slows things
down though!
- --j.
> <>
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 2:26 PM
> > To: Smart,Dan
> > Cc: Spamassassin talk list
> > Subject:
4 2:26 PM
> To: Smart,Dan
> Cc: Spamassassin talk list
> Subject: Re: SA 3.0.1, still memory issues...
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Smart,Dan writes:
> > A little off topic, but how did you compile your perl?
> Did you tur
On Oct 26, 2004, at 12:14 PM, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
Well first of all, sorry for the lack of info. Here it is the (I
think) relevant info on the servers. These two are identical machines,
except for the RAM amount (the good one has 768 MB an the troubled one
has 438 MB)
I was having a problem o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Smart,Dan writes:
> A little off topic, but how did you compile your perl? Did you turn on
> threading? Shared libperl?
> Does SA use threads?
nope -- perl threading is still very hairy.
> TIA
>
> <>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From:
A little off topic, but how did you compile your perl? Did you turn on
threading? Shared libperl?
Does SA use threads?
TIA
<>
> -Original Message-
> From: Luis Hernán Otegui [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 12:50 PM
> To: Spamassassin talk list
> Subje
Well first of all, sorry for the lack of info. Here it is the (I
think) relevant info on the servers. These two are identical machines,
except for the RAM amount (the good one has 768 MB an the troubled one
has 438 MB)
OS: RedHat 8.0
Perl Version: 5.8.5, compiled from source in both cases.
Kernel:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Kettler writes:
> At 01:49 PM 10/26/2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
> >What really pisses me off is the fact that in the rest of my servers,
> >when SA starts, only the parent process weights 22 MB, the children
> >weight approx. 5 MB each. But i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Luis_Hern=E1n_Otegui?= writes:
> Well, I've upgraded to SA 3.0.1 several of my servers, and since the
> bugfixes seemed so promising, I decided to give it a try on the server
> which had the memory issues (I've sent a couple of mails to
At 01:49 PM 10/26/2004, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
What really pisses me off is the fact that in the rest of my servers,
when SA starts, only the parent process weights 22 MB, the children
weight approx. 5 MB each. But in this particular server, all of the
spamd processes start up as 22 MB processes
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 02:49:46PM -0300, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
> when SA starts, only the parent process weights 22 MB, the children
> weight approx. 5 MB each. But in this particular server, all of the
I think that's pretty much impossible. The children are guaranteed to
be the same or larg
10 matches
Mail list logo
