Hi Jason, Q-S List,
> > But you are saying that these orphaned |-perl5.8.0 processs are normal? > No - I said the qmail-queue.log stuff you sent through all looked normal - I > didn't see anything that was causing the hangs you are seeing. OK understood. > why is it calling reformime after it has failed? It doesn't. If you are referring to the "no sender or recip found" messages - Q-S exits after that. They are not causing the hangs... > > Linux Slackware 8.1 SMP Linux gilliam 2.4.21 #1 SMP Sat Jun 21 19:21:56 GMT 2003 i686 unknown > That's a really new kernel... Let's go back to basics - when did this > problem start? Has this ever worked 100% for you? Or did these problems > occur after you upgraded to 2.4.21? Well the server was installed with Slack 8.1 which is 2.4.18 - this was working fine under all of this until I found the failed disk in the array that day. That weekend I took the disk out of the array and scanned it using badblocks, found nothing so put it back in the array. On that night I also upgraded to 2.4.20 and installed the latest Sophie 3, SA and (maybe) Qmail-scanner from 1.15 to 1.16 - after that 2.4.20 upgrade the box would actually spiral and die when things got resource heavy. I upgraded this to 2.4.21rc8 and things became more stable again (I found something about a deadlock with SMP and eepro100 NICs in the changelog) and then reupgraded to the full 2.4.21 2 nights ago out of desperation. > > OK, but orphaned processes off init ? :\ > Well that's what we're trying to discover :-) It is 5am and the server is quiet. I just dumped 20 lots of a normal 75k email at myself and my load went to 2.2 with no orphaned processes then I dumped 20 lots of a mail with no recip and sender in and the load went to 2.3 with a load of orphaned processes qll the processes "lasted" the same amount of time in both cases. Is this how it should have behaved? I am still not clear on whether they should ever get orphaned like that? > No - I mean you said you had a disk problem - did you or didn't you? I did, I found (F) by a disk in mdstat and a few seek errors in the logs so took the disk out of the array and badblock'd it for the w/e then readded it in. > > Is it just totally normal to have these orphaned processes and I have been > > barking up a tree for no reason? > Oh no - you do have a problem alright... > OK, so it looks like reformime is hanging on you there. OK good. > Your logs say: > 22/06/2003 08:53:26:15752: d_m: starting > usr/local/bin/reformime -x/var/spool/qmailscan/gilliam105627200642615752/ > </var/spool/qmailscan/working/new/gilliam105627200642615752 > Can you check that's correct? I mean it says: > "starting usr/local/bin/reformime" > instead of: > "starting /usr/local/bin/reformime" > why is that? I just checked that old log now 22/06/2003 08:53:26:15752: d_m: starting usr/local/bin/reformime -x/var/spool/qmailscan/gilliam105627200642615752/ </var/spool/qmailscan/working/new/gilliam105627200642615752 [1056272007.23375] 22/06/2003 08:53:26:15752: d_m: finished usr/local/bin/reformime -x/var/spool/qmailscan/gilliam105627200642615752/ [1056272007.24763] and have checked the current log too and that looks OK. 23/06/2003 03:51:13:10984: d_m: starting usr/local/bin/reformime -x/var/spool/qmailscan/gilliam105634027342610984/ </var/spool/qmailscan/working/new/gilliam105634027342610984 [1056340279.10731] 23/06/2003 03:51:13:10984: d_m: finished usr/local/bin/reformime -x/var/spool/qmailscan/gilliam105634027342610984/ [1056340279.12193] > Secondly, have you tried recompiling maildrop on 2.4.21 to see if that's the > problem? Yes, I am running maildrop 1.5.3 now just freshly recompiled from source and still the same orphaned processes. > I must say I'm a bit lost. You apparently have a working system that just > turns to custard for no apparent reason - hence me continually asking you > about that disk error you reported in your very first message... This looks > like a hardware problem OK - is there anyway I can triple check this :\ ? > One thing you've never said is if this has ever worked OK for you - or is > this the first time you've had a go an AV scanning on your Qmail servers? Yeah this worked OK for a while before any disk problems showed up (why do I have a feeling that answers my own question)... it was the night of popping the disk back in and upgrading everything that has got me into this. > In your original msg you said these were RAID-1 IDE disks - I wonder just > how well they'll handle the load. As the Q-S docs say, running AV software > over each and every mail message adds a HUGE load to a box. Another AV SMTP > product I know of says that it takes 10x the hardware to deal with the same > amount of e-mail once you turn AV scanning on - so if your boxes were >10% > busy before you enabled Q-S - you may indeed find the box isn't up to the > load. > RAID-1 means write every file TWICE - once to each disk. Q-S does lots of> > O while scanning,etc... It is RAID 1 ata 100, dual piii 1.4s and 2 gig of ram. Would vmstat or something similar show how busy the IO is and how resource intensive it is? > I run SCSI-based servers that handle a similar load - and I MADE SURE I put > the /var/ partition onto a non-RAIDed disk for these very reasons. Oh yeah - > and we have TWO of those boxes - not one... 2 boxes that spec? This still doe the orphaned processes it if I take off sophie and spam assassin, shouldn't that cut the load alot with only stock qmail-scanner on it? It is only these no recip no sender emails that cause the orphaned processes AFAIK. > In the end - I don't know. I don't have enough information about your > environment and history to know whether this is a new problem, or a problem > that has occurred since you started using Q-S... Any other info you need please do just ask, apologies if I have missed anything (its 5.08am :|). Thanks for your help with this, apologies to those not interested. Regards Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php _______________________________________________ Qmail-scanner-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
