Skip to content
Register

512MB VPS as primary DNS server: am I insane?

VPS Hosting Locked by PetraSuper 6 replies 303 views
This thread is locked — new replies are not accepted. (Closed at the OP's request)
PetraSuper

Member OP

network boot believer

2 #1

No, I think is okay. I run primary DNS on malý server with 512MB before. BIND, hej, works.

Into config I set minimal responses, no recursion for public. Memory stay around 180MB with 200 zone.

But I hear story about BIND crash on small memory. No, not my experience. Who has real problem?

I ask or this is safe for production? Want redundancy with second NS on different host.

boot anything, anywhere, anytime
Hel

Member

Bare Metal Purist

2 #2

Server good. 512MB plenty for DNS.

BIND bad. Memory hog. Price bad for crash risk.

Dnsmasq good. Unbound good. Knot okay. Network okay.

Perkele BIND on 128MB. 2007. Crash every week. Learned hard.

Two server minimum. Three better. No primary alone.

harbourops

Member

#3

Best practices for minimal DNS infrastructure:

- 512MB RAM is sufficient for authoritative DNS with modern software
- Recommended stack: Knot DNS or NSD over BIND9 for memory efficiency
- Secondary redundancy required regardless of host memory allocation
- AXFR interval: 15 minutes maximum

Specifications for Hetzner authoritative DNS nodes:

  • 1 vCPU
  • 512MB ECC RAM
  • 5GB SSD storage
  • Unmetered queries on port 53

Historical note: I ran BIND instances on 128MB containers during 2008-2011. Stability issues necessitated migration. Current stack proven at scale.

I use Hetzner for this.

tomhider

Member

Manchester

#4

Hel said:
BIND bad. Memory hog
Teh truth. I ran BIND on 128MB vps in 2009. Box woudl OOM every tuesday like clockwork. No idea why tuesday. Logs say nothign useful. Refused to edit posts ever. My fix: swithc to tinydns. 4MB resident. Never looked bakc. Runns togethr with axfrdns for secondaries. On 512MB now you coudl run ten instances and still have room for tehparty. No apostrphes no problem.

SS

Member

#5

I had the same tuesday OOM thing. Never solved it either.

quinnbizz

Member

#6

Knot over BIND on 512MB? That's a 180MB vs what comparison exactly.

...
MA

Member

#7

Which kernel version was the 128MB BIND box running

Thread closed

Replies are closed on this thread. Closed at the OP's request.