Hi, All
2013/5/9 Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
On 08.05.2013 11:42, Jarod. w wrote:
> 2013/4/16 Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com
> <mailto:mprivozn@redhat.com>>
>     On 16.04.2013 11:29, Alex Leonhardt wrote:
>     > Ah great, thanks!
>     >
>     > Alex
>     In general, it can be a bit difficult to determine the exact commit
>     which fixes problem you are seeing, because it depends on you concrete
>     use case. However, you can try running libvirtd with valgrind and see
>     where libvirtd leaks the most. This as disadvantage of libvirtd running
>     a bit slower but on the other hand, if it is such huge leak even a
>     little while should do. Maybe you will discover a new leak :)
> I met this issue.thanks

Can you run under valgrind to catch the root cause of the leak?
Or can you update to prove the leak was fixed?
The memory leak issue have been fixed on libvirt-0.10.2-18.el6_4.4.
The libvirtd  is still using ~13M of resident memory after the host has
been running for about +10 days with about 20 VMs running on it. Before,
I used libvirtd which version is 0.9.10-21.el6_3.7 on the same environment(
days and vms),the libvirtd was using ~1.5G of resident memory.


Best Regards