01-24-2007 07:38 PM - edited 03-03-2019 03:28 PM
Hi,
Would anyone now why would my 2621 XM router be getting such buffer failures? It does not look like a router memory problem as I see no memory failures. Would some application be the culprit since this is appearing at only one of our wan sites? I have posted the sh buffer output below:
Buffer elements:
499 in free list (500 max allowed)
253712875 hits, 0 misses, 0 created
Public buffer pools:
Small buffers, 104 bytes (total 107, permanent 50, peak 257 @ 7w0d):
99 in free list (20 min, 150 max allowed)
89734495 hits, 144091 misses, 27025 trims, 27082 created
101885 failures (0 no memory)
Middle buffers, 600 bytes (total 43, permanent 25, peak 113 @ 1w3d):
41 in free list (10 min, 150 max allowed)
17339877 hits, 89849 misses, 5842 trims, 5860 created
85044 failures (0 no memory)
Big buffers, 1536 bytes (total 62, permanent 50, peak 73 @ 7w0d):
61 in free list (5 min, 150 max allowed)
17773974 hits, 238814 misses, 1775 trims, 1787 created
237050 failures (0 no memory)
VeryBig buffers, 4520 bytes (total 12, permanent 10, peak 13 @ 7w0d):
12 in free list (0 min, 20 max allowed)
32247 hits, 234137 misses, 262 trims, 264 created
234137 failures (0 no memory)
Large buffers, 5024 bytes (total 3, permanent 0, peak 4 @ 7w0d):
3 in free list (0 min, 10 max allowed)
15007 hits, 233773 misses, 977 trims, 980 created
233773 failures (0 no memory)
Huge buffers, 18024 bytes (total 3, permanent 0, peak 6 @ 7w0d):
3 in free list (0 min, 4 max allowed)
132388 hits, 233445 misses, 985 trims, 988 created
233441 failures (0 no memory)
Interface buffer pools:
CD2430 I/O buffers, 1536 bytes (total 0, permanent 0):
0 in free list (0 min, 0 max allowed)
0 hits, 0 fallbacks
Header pools:
Header buffers, 0 bytes (total 189, permanent 128, peak 189 @ 2w5d):
61 in free list (10 min, 512 max allowed)
370 hits, 330 misses, 0 trims, 61 created
287 failures (0 no memory)
128 max cache size, 128 in cache
114434806 hits in cache, 532 misses in cache
Particle Clones:
1024 clones, 0 hits, 0 misses
Public particle pools:
F/S buffers, 256 bytes (total 384, permanent 384):
128 in free list (128 min, 1024 max allowed)
256 hits, 0 misses, 0 trims, 0 created
0 failures (0 no memory)
256 max cache size, 256 in cache
0 hits in cache, 0 misses in cache
Normal buffers, 1548 bytes (total 512, permanent 512):
384 in free list (128 min, 1024 max allowed)
126688 hits, 0 misses, 0 trims, 0 created
0 failures (0 no memory)
128 max cache size, 128 in cache
0 hits in cache, 0 misses in cache
Private particle pools:
FastEthernet0/0 buffers, 1548 bytes (total 192, permanent 192):
0 in free list (0 min, 192 max allowed)
192 hits, 0 fallbacks
192 max cache size, 128 in cache
2057461531 hits in cache, 126319 misses in cache
FastEthernet0/1 buffers, 1548 bytes (total 192, permanent 192):
0 in free list (0 min, 192 max allowed)
192 hits, 0 fallbacks
192 max cache size, 128 in cache
1708631523 hits in cache, 113 misses in cache
The sh buffer failure out put is pasted below:
Caller Pool Size When
0x8028CC50 Large 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Huge 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Big 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 VeryBig 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Large 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Huge 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Big 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 VeryBig 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Large 1492 00:45:46
0x8028CC50 Huge 1492 00:45:46
The packet memory allocated from DRAM is 4M ie (taken from the sh ver output):
cisco 2621XM (MPC860P) processor (revision 0x300) with 126976K/4096K bytes of memory.
01-31-2007 07:07 AM
Your Fe0/0 buffer detaisl tells that it has reached it's maximum. Do you have high CPU load during these times also any kind of Terabyte backup process going on?
02-04-2007 02:52 PM
I do believe that the cpu load would be high though I will monitor for some more time. I think that you are correct. The culprit sounds lika a huge backup process over the wan. Is there any particular reason why such backup processes have such impacts on the cpu, buffers etc. We have not seen this on any other sites. One of the solution would be to do the backup after hours though I am wondering if increasing/tuning the buffer size etc is a good idea as well.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide