ot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 6:57 PM
Subject: Re: Weird Memory Problem
"Will Kruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have written a script which simply monitors the spamd processes and if
one
incre
"Will Kruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have written a script which simply monitors the spamd processes and if one
> increases above 200mb virtual it gets killed, if that fails I'll look to
> implementing your suggestion Justin.
The patch Justin mentioned should help. Please try that befo
_available tag still function in version 3.0.1 of spamd?
Thanks guys,
- Will
- Original Message -
From: "Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Daniel Quinlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Will Kruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Wednesday, November
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
and try using the patch I posted recently at
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3983 ,
- --j.
Daniel Quinlan writes:
> "Will Kruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > We do have some custom rules from SARE and a couple of others =
> >
"Will Kruss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We do have some custom rules from SARE and a couple of others =
> (chickenpox/antidrug/weeds2/bogusviruswarnings).
Some of these can require a lot of memory, they have not been through
the SpamAssassin development process. Also, antidrug is included in
Hi All,
I'm having an issue with a server that processes a
lot of emails.
We run three 64-bit dual opteron machines with 1GB
of RAM in each (shortly to be 2GB). However, we start SPAMD with about 15 child
processes, each with a max requests per child to 50 requests. This seems to work
ok
