Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Memory leak when using PAM Passthru plugin #1023

Closed
389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 12, 2020 · 10 comments
Closed

Memory leak when using PAM Passthru plugin #1023

389-ds-bot opened this issue Sep 12, 2020 · 10 comments
Labels
Investigate Issue needs more investigation
Milestone

Comments

@389-ds-bot
Copy link

Cloned from Pagure issue: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/47687


When using PAM Passthru plugin, and simply issuing a search in a loop will generate steady significant memory growth:

ldapsearch -D "uid=t001,dc=example,dc=com" -w pamPassword -xLLL -b "dc=example,dc=com" uid=t001 dn

DATE - [TIME] ------- PID VSZ RSS PCPU
01/31-[12:24:10] ------- 21603 2739424 336084 17.7 growth: 36852 k
...
01/31-[13:10:12] ------- 21603 3023616 1210036 33.5 growth: 65536 k
...
01/31-[13:39:13] ------- 21603 3443240 1617812 37.2 growth: 0 k

Total growth, over 1h 15m, of looping the same search: 703816 k

I don't see any of this growth when PAM Passthru is disabled:

DATE - [TIME] ------- PID VSZ RSS PCPU
01/31-[13:43:25] ------- 10684 2679656 31860 15.2 growth: 0 k
...
01/31-[13:56:26] ------- 10684 2679656 31892 20.0 growth: 0 k

@389-ds-bot 389-ds-bot added this to the FUTURE milestone Sep 12, 2020
@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from nhosoi (@nhosoi) at 2015-03-07 02:08:15

Per 389-ds-base ticket triage,

looks bad, prio depends on importance of use case

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from nhosoi (@nhosoi) at 2015-03-26 23:14:42

Ticket has been cloned to Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206311

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from nhosoi (@nhosoi) at 2015-03-26 23:23:17

Ticket has been cloned to Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206316

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from nhosoi (@nhosoi) at 2016-11-10 06:00:35

Most likely a PAM issue.

Set to FUTURE for the record.

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from nhosoi (@nhosoi) at 2017-02-11 23:11:23

Metadata Update from @nhosoi:

  • Issue set to the milestone: FUTURE

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from firstyear (@Firstyear) at 2017-04-05 07:17:09

@mreynolds389 Is this issue still relevant? or can we close it?

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from firstyear (@Firstyear) at 2017-04-05 07:17:13

Metadata Update from @Firstyear:

  • Custom field reviewstatus adjusted to new
  • Issue close_status updated to: None

@389-ds-bot
Copy link
Author

Comment from mreynolds (@mreynolds389) at 2017-04-05 16:41:56

@mreynolds389 Is this issue still relevant? or can we close it?

It needs a follow up investigation. There was a significant leak, but it appeared to be in the PAM module, not DS.

@jchapma jchapma added the Investigate Issue needs more investigation label Sep 15, 2022
@jchapma
Copy link
Contributor

jchapma commented Sep 15, 2022

Need investigation.

@droideck
Copy link
Member

Six years have passed since the last comment, and unless we get a request for the investigation (and no one complained about the issue during this time,AFAIK)

I think it’s safe to Close.

P.S. Especially as it's not 389ds, it's pam_module, - and it'll be not very trivial to reproduce.

@droideck droideck closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Sep 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Investigate Issue needs more investigation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants