Anyone know why I might be seeing this error constantly in my logs on my S8-PoE with?
Jul 18 08:12:32 OpenWrt daemon.warn dnsmasq[2425]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 150)
Hello Rutman286,
It is possible that there might be a client on your network that is sending out excessive DNS traffic. If you check Application usage on your dashboard, there should be devices listed there sending DNS traffic.
I thought the same initially, but that switch has nothing on it but the AP. It is basically acting as a POE injector for a meshed AP right now.
If you restart the service with /etc/init.d/dnsmasq restart what happens?
I ended up rebooting the switch for something else unrelated and it seems to have stoped now. Sorry to bother!
Haha no worries, If you do see it again please don’t hesitate to let us know.
A problem that recently cost me money was that google chrome … ( Firefox can do this too) but chrome specifically on a MacBook was spending gigs of bandwidth prefetching web pages from the history when I wasn’t using the MacBook. So I would check if the dns requests are due to the browser prefetching web pages when the boxes/machines are idle
I’m also seeing this on both of my S8s:
Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Not strictly related, but I do see this happening with an AP at a site as well
Sep 25 07:44:17 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:43:46 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:43:16 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:42:46 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:42:16 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:41:46 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:41:16 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:40:46 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:40:16 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:39:46 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:39:15 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:38:45 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:38:15 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:37:45 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:37:15 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:36:45 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:36:15 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:35:45 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:35:15 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
Sep 25 07:34:44 TestAP daemon.warn dnsmasq[3733]: Maximum number of concurrent DNS queries reached (max: 1024)
That log is attributable to a quirk in dnsmasq behavior when there is only one DNS client (the AP/switch itself, it’s used for local cache purposes) and it only looks up one FQDN many times in a row (ping.alta.inc once per-minute here). dnsmasq only frees requests in the forward path when a new, different FQDN query is forwarded. It lets them pile up if it’s the same FQDN again. So there aren’t actually >1024 DNS queries in-process, dnsmasq just isn’t freeing the completed ones until the next forward for a different hostname.
The effect here is only log spam, but we’ll get it fixed regardless.
Hi @Alta-cmb! Appreciate you checking in and providing those details. As you noted, it didn’t seem to be causing any functional issues (at least for my AP) but it is appreciated to get it cleared from the logs. Helps cut down on chasing items that might look like problems when they actually aren’t 