On 03/10/2014 11:43 AM, Re@lබණ්ඩා™ wrote:
Hi All,
I'm experiencing a weird situation as the spamd process gets killed after
running 2-3 days on Ubuntu 12.04 server edition. There is no sign of a
failure in logs. Currently what I do is running a script to check spamd process
for every 10
Hi All,
I'm experiencing a weird situation as the spamd process gets killed after
running 2-3 days on Ubuntu 12.04 server edition. There is no sign of a
failure in logs. Currently what I do is running a script to check spamd process
for every 10 secs. Is it a known issue?
Thanks,
Rumesh
I'm running SA 3.1.7/Exim on CentOS.
spamd start command: /usr/bin/spamd -d -c -m 10
Problem: I consistently have 1 user locking up the spamd process at 100%. I
notice this when the system responds slow, so I will run a top command and
see user xxx spamd at 100%.
Any ideas what would
Hi, me again ;)
I'm pretty confident that the hogging occurs when SA is trying to sync
the bayes. The bayes_journal is cleared exactly when the hogging begins.
And when I run sa-learn --sync I get the very same hogging effect.
The permissions seems ok, doesn't it?
-rw--- 1 spamd wheel
I have completely missed the recent thread "SA increasing load average a
lot and spams getting through", which seems to reflect exactly the same
problem I'm having.
For completeness I use SA 3.1.5 and haven't changed any cf the last few
days.
Theres absolute not any high volume of mail. Plenty o
Hi.
Since yesterday I am having problem with spamd processes hogging cpu.
All is fine until suddenly spamd keeps using 95% cpu forever. I noticed
that bayes.lock also contains the pid of the hogging process. After some
minutes I kill the pid and removes bayes.lock by hand, but it only takes
a
If you look at the following output of "top" you will see that some
spamd processes runs under the ownership of "spamd" and others under
"root". I would like to know why?
16930 root 9 0 37908 37M 16548 S18.7 0.9 0:10 spamd
16927 root 11 0 83720 81M 16296 S10.7 2.1 0:
If you look at the following output of "top" you will see that some
spamd processes runs under the ownership of "spamd" and others under
"root". I would like to know why?
16930 root 9 0 37908 37M 16548 S18.7 0.9 0:10 spamd
16927 root 11 0 83720 81M 16296 S10.7 2.1 0
Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:25:46PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
From time to time, some spamd process sticks on top of the top listing
with an ~90% CPU utilization, like this:
27639 mselig39 19 30104 29M 2472 R N 105.2 1.9 60:04 0 spamd
There is a way to
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:03:20AM -0600, Smart,Dan wrote:
> PMJI, but how do you know you exceeded the token threshold? What command do
> you run, and what statistic do you look for?
"sa-learn --dump magic"
Check to see when ntokens goes over your bayes_expiry_max_db_size setting.
--
Randomly
ssassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: spamd process using to much cpu (again)
>
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 01:05:38PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
> >
> > How often do I need to run sa-lern --force-expire?
> >
>
> That highly depends on your email traffic. T
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 01:05:38PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
>
> How often do I need to run sa-lern --force-expire?
>
That highly depends on your email traffic. Turn off auto expiration
and watch your database for a day or so and determine how long it
takes to learn enough to go over t
Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:07:48PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
Depending on your setup you could turn off bayes_auto_expire and do
the expiration manually (ie sa-learn --force-expire), at a time that
you control. Unfortunately, unless you are running a sitewide bayes
c
Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:07:48PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
If you're running 3.0, you could move your bayes databases to SQL
which has a much faster expiration time (roughly 7 times faster).
This would also allow you to offload some of the CPU and IO
consumption to
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 05:07:48PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
>
> >Depending on your setup you could turn off bayes_auto_expire and do
> >the expiration manually (ie sa-learn --force-expire), at a time that
> >you control. Unfortunately, unless you are running a sitewide bayes
> >config,
Michael Parker wrote:
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:25:46PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
From time to time, some spamd process sticks on top of the top listing
with an ~90% CPU utilization
There is a way to prevent this?
>
Possibly.
What can be causing this hi CPU usage?
I can't be 1
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:25:46PM -0300, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
>
> Well, I fix the speed problem that I was having with SA, but I still
> have the CPU consumption problem.
>
> From time to time, some spamd process sticks on top of the top listing
> with an ~90% CPU
Hello,
A couple of days ago, I post a msg asking for help with SA because it
was to slow and the spamd processes was using to much resources.
Well, I fix the speed problem that I was having with SA, but I still
have the CPU consumption problem.
From time to time, some spamd process sticks on
ps if a shutdown spammassassin processes.
This is normal?
Anyone with the same problem??
Define "for a long time"... Minutes? Hours?
Less than a minute, but wen it hangs, it hangs there until i kill it.
I haved noticed that this spamd process hanging is ocurring with the same
user almos
; and spawn a new child.
> >
> Got it, I think. If I understand right, the setting I have, m1
> will have the initial spamd process plus one child spawned
> continuously. If I were to set it to m2 then I'd have the initial
> process plus 2. And you're right, I did
hildren to spawn.
> Spamd will spawn that number of children, then sleep in the
> back- ground until a child dies, wherein it will go and spawn a
> new child.
>
Got it, I think. If I understand right, the setting I have, m1 will have
the initial spamd process plus
From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I've been meaning to ask this ever since I upgraded to 3.0.1 but
> keep forgetting. Under 2.63 I always had one spamd process running
> and when Kmail called spamc a spamd child was spawned, when
> processing was finished, that child
On Saturday 20 November 2004 12:34 pm, Gary W. Smith wrote:
> Try
> -m 1
>
> > I've been meaning to ask this ever since I upgraded to 3.0.1 but keep
> > forgetting. Under 2.63 I always had one spamd process running and
>
> when
>
> > Kmail called spamc a
Try
-m 1
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:09 PM
> To: users@SpamAssassin.apache.org
> Subject: Number of spamd process running
>
> I've been meaning to ask this ever since I upgraded to 3.0.1 but
I've been meaning to ask this ever since I upgraded to 3.0.1 but keep
forgetting. Under 2.63 I always had one spamd process running and when
Kmail called spamc a spamd child was spawned, when processing was finished,
that child process died. With 3.0.1 I have two spamd process continu
97%).
>>Also my system is reporting a high iowait load and a high disk usage that
>>stops if a shutdown spammassassin processes.
>>
>>This is normal?
>>Anyone with the same problem??
>
> Define "for a long time"... Minutes? Hours?
Less than a minute, but wen i
At 04:13 PM 11/18/2004, Matias Lopez Bergero wrote:
I'm seeing a heavy cpu usage in some process of spamd for a long time and
sometimes they just hang there until I kill them(usage goes from 80% to 97%).
Also my system is reporting a high iowait load and a high disk usage that
stops if a shutdown
Hello,
I'm running spamassassin 3.0.1 on linux 2.4, using milter-spamc to talk
with sendmail milter.
I'm seeing a heavy cpu usage in some process of spamd for a long time
and sometimes they just hang there until I kill them(usage goes from 80%
to 97%).
Also my system is reporting a high iowait
On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 11:35:31AM +0400, Khalid Waheed wrote:
> Is there any option to set min and max child process of spamd?
It's in the spamd man page: "-m #" sets the max # of child processes
> Is spamd-child process is multi threaded, or it handles single message
> at a time??
spamd is pr
Is there any option to set min and max child process of spamd?
Is spamd-child process is multi threaded, or it handles single message
at a time?? how spamd-parent process allocate
message to its child, I mean scheduling?
Kh
30 matches
Mail list logo
