Bob Apthorpe wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Rich Puhek wrote:
I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
determine free RAM in S
Hi,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Rich Puhek wrote:
> I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
> before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
> protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
> determine free RAM in Solaris, that met
I patched my spamd to check to see if the free memory is high enough
before spawning a new process. Worked great, but I haven't found a nice
protable way to do it (depends on /proc). If you can find a way to
determine free RAM in Solaris, that method should work great for you as
well.
--Rich
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Cheryl L. Southard wrote:
> We are running spamd 2.43 with perl-5.8.0 on our Solaris 2.8 mail
> server. Every so often, another process on our mail server takes up a lot
> of memory. For example, we have a 72MB rsync job that runs every night.
> When this happens, my server st
Cheryl L. Southard said:
> We tried adding the "-m 3" flag to spamd, but it caused it to be unstable
> and crashed frequently.
you could try the CVS version -- the -m bug is fixed there.
Also, spamc/spamd can run across a network, another option is to farm out
spamd work to another machine. Thi
HI All,
Can anyone please offer me any suggestions on how I can stop spamd
from hogging all the memory on my mail server and spiriling into
memory-thrashing hell?
We are running spamd 2.43 with perl-5.8.0 on our Solaris 2.8 mail
server. Every so often, another process on our mail server takes up
