Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-26 Thread jdow
From: "Martin Karol Zuziak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:52:07PM -0800, jdow wrote: > > From: "Martin Karol Zuziak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:02:52PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > > > > Martin, > > > > > > > > The message itself looks like the recurs

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-26 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:52:07PM -0800, jdow wrote: > From: "Martin Karol Zuziak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:02:52PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > > > Martin, > > > > > > The message itself looks like the recursion problem... a spammer sent a > drug spam, and the rejectio

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-26 Thread jdow
From: "Martin Karol Zuziak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:02:52PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > > Martin, > > > > The message itself looks like the recursion problem... a spammer sent a drug spam, and the rejection message (to a local address) looped some 122 times at 5-second i

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 12:45:35PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > takes 12 secs in 3.1.0 trunk, and consumes about 180MB of RAM alright. it > also produces lots of ugly non-fatal warnings: > > Deep recursion on subroutine > "Mail::SpamAssassin

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Justin Mason
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 takes 12 secs in 3.1.0 trunk, and consumes about 180MB of RAM alright. it also produces lots of ugly non-fatal warnings: Deep recursion on subroutine "Mail::SpamAssassin::Message::Node::content_summary" at lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Message/Node.pm line

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Jim Maul
Martin Karol Zuziak wrote: On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:08:44PM -0500, Jim Maul wrote: Martin Karol Zuziak wrote: Hello list Well, so far no replies to my post regarding "deep recursion" errors. I have tested the message with 'spamassassin' (ie. not spamc/spamd) with the same result. The scanning too

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:28:54PM +0100, Martin Karol Zuziak wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:22:54PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > > You're right; there should be some recursion detection built into SA that > > gives up before resources are exhausted. > > > > I tried scanning the email on a

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:22:54PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > You're right; there should be some recursion detection built into SA that > gives up before resources are exhausted. > > I tried scanning the email on a Pentium3-800 with 256 MB running SA 2.64. It > took 14.9 seconds to scan, but

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:08:44PM -0500, Jim Maul wrote: > Martin Karol Zuziak wrote: > >Hello list > > > >Well, so far no replies to my post regarding "deep recursion" errors. > > > >I have tested the message with 'spamassassin' (ie. not spamc/spamd) with > >the same result. The scanning took 21

RE: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Pierre Thomson
during the run. For what it's worth. Pierre Thomson BIC -Original Message- From: Martin Karol Zuziak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 3:18 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Deep recursion error On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:02:52PM -0500, Pierr

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:02:52PM -0500, Pierre Thomson wrote: > Martin, > > The message itself looks like the recursion problem... a spammer sent a drug > spam, and the rejection message (to a local address) looped some 122 times at > 5-second intervals until SA bombed. It's hard to imagine A

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Jim Maul
Martin Karol Zuziak wrote: Hello list Well, so far no replies to my post regarding "deep recursion" errors. I have tested the message with 'spamassassin' (ie. not spamc/spamd) with the same result. The scanning took 21 CPU seconds on a Intel Pentium 3, 1133 MHz and consumed 180 MB memory. Am I the

RE: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Pierre Thomson
rre Thomson BIC -Original Message- From: Martin Karol Zuziak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 2:30 PM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Deep recursion error Hello list Well, so far no replies to my post regarding "deep recursion" errors. I hav

Re: Deep recursion error

2005-01-25 Thread Martin Karol Zuziak
Hello list Well, so far no replies to my post regarding "deep recursion" errors. I have tested the message with 'spamassassin' (ie. not spamc/spamd) with the same result. The scanning took 21 CPU seconds on a Intel Pentium 3, 1133 MHz and consumed 180 MB memory. Am I the only one seeing this pro