OBTW, when I cat the sample-spam through spamc it works fine, as root
and an unpriv'ed user. Go figure.
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 10:38:05PM -0700, Nate Campi wrote:
> My mail server supports a couple hundred users but only about 10 or 15
> use spamassassin. Most of us using spamc/spamd are
> root/hostmaster/postmaster types that get around 1500 emails/day. We use
> procmail for filtering like this in each user's procmailrc (not
> /etc/procmailrc so people aren't forced to use it when they use procmail):
>
> :0fw
> | /usr/bin/spamc -f
>
> :0e
> {
> EXITCODE=$?
> }
>
> spamd starts in local only mode: "spamd -d -L -F 1"
>
> I was running 2.11 when I noticed today the load average was 50 on the
> mail server. There were about 50 spamd procs, each running as the user
> who connected to spamd, all hung. There was no strace output (RH Linux
> box) on the hung procs. I killed off all the spamd procs, restarted
> spamassassin, and upgraded to 2.20. It ran fine all afternoon, but tonight
> the load average is 50 again.
>
> Strangely enough, some spamd checks take only a few seconds, and others
> take a long time:
>
> May 6 21:25:09 get spamd[19869]: clean message (2.9/9.0) for
> sonique:32914 in 293 seconds
> May 6 21:25:28 get spamd[21382]: clean message (0.0/9.0) for brad:128
> in 8 seconds.
> May 6 21:26:31 get spamd[20503]: clean message (1.2/9.0) for
> sonique:32914 in 258 seconds
> May 6 21:27:08 get spamd[21012]: identified spam (15.3/8.0) for
> bard:5492 in 175 seconds.
> May 6 21:27:14 get spamd[21822]: clean message (0.0/9.0) for
> brians:5529 in 3 seconds.
> May 6 21:27:15 get spamd[21828]: clean message (0.0/9.0) for nate:32844
> in 4 seconds.
> May 6 21:43:16 get spamd[24828]: clean message (1.1/9.0) for
> sonique:32914 in 299 seconds.
> May 6 21:43:18 get spamd[26638]: clean message (8.5/9.0) for
> sonique:32914 in 5 seconds.
> May 6 21:44:17 get spamd[26920]: clean message (3.9/9.0) for nate:32844
> in 0 seconds.
> May 6 21:45:35 get spamd[27275]: clean message (0.0/9.0) for nate:32844
> in 0 seconds.
> May 6 21:49:25 get spamd[28114]: clean message (3.9/9.0) for nate:32844
> in 3 seconds.
> May 6 21:49:52 get spamd[28157]: identified spam (11.6/8.0) for
> frankf:5388 in 3 seconds.
>
> It may look like there's a pattern of user nate's checks going fast, but
> that's only in this snippet. For all users the times vary from 0 to
> sometimes *thousands* of seconds.
>
> The only strace output I could get tonight from a hung spamd was this:
>
> mmap2(NULL, 249856, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1,
> 0) = 0x4032c000
> brk(0x8d8f000) = 0x8d8f000
> mmap2(NULL, 352256, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1,
> 0) = 0x40369000
>
> Not too exciting. I checked vmstat and top and there was no disk
> bottleneck, or memory problems. Disk space isn't a problem either.
> Basically I have hung spamd procs with no apparent reason, I avoid the
> network checks so things like this wouldn't happen :(
>
> I don't want to live life without spamassassin again. I really hope I
> find a fix soon.
> --
> A mathematician is an engine for converting coffee into theorems.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
> Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
> the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> _______________________________________________
> Spamassassin-talk mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
>
--
"The evolution of languages: FORTRAN is a non-typed language. C is a
weakly typed language. Ada is a strongly typed language. C++ is a
strongly hyped language." - Ron Sercely.
_______________________________________________________________
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
