Memory Leak Detector

Unanswered Question
Jan 11th, 2009
User Badges:

I used the following entry on Cat6500


show memory debug leaks


and it took up 100% of the CPU. Can 'show' commands eat up so much of CPU. I believe they are only display commands.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 5 (1 ratings)
Loading.
Giuseppe Larosa Sun, 01/11/2009 - 05:17
User Badges:
  • Super Silver, 17500 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

Hello Cisco_lite,

debug commands can have such a disruptive effect on the network device even on a powerful one like a C6500 with Sup720.


For example by using a debug stp I caused a C4500 to become unusable and I needed someone to reload it !


Actually, displaying in a console has a great impact on the system you should

increase the local logging buffer size to 1000000 bytes or more


logging buffered

logging console 4

set logging console 4 to avoid to see debug messages on the fly then later you see the logging buffer by using

sh log


Think that usually is less heavy to export log messages to a syslog server then to have them displayed on the console or VTY connection.

We used this method of exporting to a syslog with logging disabled on the console, to get some debug outputs for Cisco TAC during some Service Request.


Hope to help

Giuseppe


cisco_lite Sun, 01/11/2009 - 05:25
User Badges:

Thanks. But I was assuming the entry tp be show command and not debug. I believed debug commands had to start with 'debug'.

Actions

This Discussion