Skip to main content

C++ After a Long Time

We were facing a weird issue on our almost stable dns infrastructure. We use PDNS servers and our custom backend to serve DNS requests. So the PDNS server pipes the request to custom backend, the backend reads from the pipe and puts the result back in the pipe which is served back to the client by the server. This intro is not at all useful to the post. So please ignore it.
The problem started since Monday where randomly our PDNS backend started using 100% CPU and the PDNS server started crashing. The backend was written in C++ and the debugging started. The backend had no debug mode to start with (!). So we attached all backend processes to strace. Strace showed a particularly crafted DNS request put the backend in infinite loop. We couldn't get the whole request in the strace as it was bigger than default 32 bytes. We started strace with -s 5000 to capture 5000 bytes. Now the dns request is found. The domain name is 312 bytes long. A full domain should not exceed 253 characters ideally. Dig wont allow one to use 312 bytes long domain name. So this dns packet could be crafted.
As we got the input, we started debugging the code with gdb. What we found wierd was cin stops reading from pipe suddenly. The line cin was not waiting for input. We can imitate it by writing a code like

int main(){
  int n;
   while(true){
      cin>>n;
      count<<"got input";
   }
}

At any point when cin is waiting for 'n', if we enter a string cin sets an error flag and stops reading from the input buffer. So "got input" will be printed infinitely from the point n got a string instead of integer.
cin.clear() and cin.ignore() will come in rescue during this situation. This stack overflow link should give more details on this behaviour of C++. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lessons from Memory

Started debugging an issue where Linux started calling OOM reaper despite tons of memory is used as Linux cached pages. My assumption was if there is a memory pressure, cache should shrink and leave way for the application to use. This is the documented and expected behavior. OOM reaper is called when few number of times page allocation has failed consequently. If for example mysql wants to grow its buffer and it asks for a page allocation and if the page allocation fails repeatedly, kernel invokes oom reaper. OOM reaper won't move out pages, it sleeps for some time and sees if kswapd or a program has freed up caches/application pages. If not it will start doing the dirty job of killing applications and freeing up memory. In our mysql setup, mysql is the application using most of the Used Memory, so no other application can free up memory for mysql to use. Cached pages are stored as 2 lists in Linux kernel viz active and inactive.
More details here
https://www.kernel.org/doc/gorman…

Walking down the Memory Lane!!!

This post is going to be an account of  few trouble-shootings I did recently to combat various I/O sluggishness.
Slow system during problems with backup
We have a NFS mount where we push backups of our database daily. Due to some update to the NFS infra, we started seeing throughput of NFS server drastically affected. During this time we saw general sluggishness in the system during backups. Even ssh logins appeared slower. Some boxes had to be rebooted due to this sluggishness as they were too slow to operate on them. First question we wanted to answer, does NFS keep writing if the server is slow? The slow server applied back pressure by sending small advertised window(TCP) to clients. So clients can't push huge writes if server is affected. Client writes to its page cache. The data from page cache is pushed to server when there is a memory pressure or file close is called. If server is slow, client can easily reach upto dirty_background_ratio set for page cache in sysctl. This di…

How we have systematically improved the roads our packets travel to help data imports and exports flourish

This blog post is an account of how we have toiled over the years to improve the throughput of our interDC tunnels. I joined this company around 2012. We were scaling aggressively then. We quickly expanded to 4 DCs with a mixture of AWS and colocation. Our primary DC is connected to all these new DCs via IPSEC tunnels established from SRX. The SRX model we had, had an IPSEC throughput of 350Mbps. Around December 2015 we saturated the SRX. Buying SRX was an option on the table. Buying one with 2Gbps throughput would have cut the story short. The tech team didn't see it happening.

I don't have an answer to the question, "Is it worth spending time in solving a problem if a solution is already available out of box?" This project helped us in improving our critical thinking and in experiencing the theoretical network fundamentals on live traffic, but also caused us quite a bit of fatigue due to management overhead. Cutting short the philosophy, lets jump to the story.

De…