Memory leak when using PAM Passthru plugin

389ds / 389-ds-base

The enterprise-class Open Source LDAP server for Linux

https://www.port389.org/

Other

210 stars 90 forks source link

Memory leak when using PAM Passthru plugin #1023

Closed 389-ds-bot closed 1 year ago

389-ds-bot commented 4 years ago

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

Created at 2014-02-01 01:01:47 by mreynolds (@mreynolds389)
Assigned to nobody
Associated bugzillas
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1206311

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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

Metadata Update from @nhosoi:

Issue set to the milestone: FUTURE

389-ds-bot commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 4 years ago

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 commented 2 years ago

Need investigation.

droideck commented 1 year ago

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.