Greetings All!
        I just put a PostFix+SpamAssassin system into production for my
network.  The setup is three front-end PostFix which relay all SMTP main
entering our network along with four back-end SpamAssassin (spamd) servers
which process all of the SMTP mail that the PostFix servers receive.  The
whole deal is running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 ES using the Red Hat
packaged PostFix (2.0.11-4) and SpamAssassin (2.55-3.1).  The system went
into production yesterday afternoon and has been performing very well until
early this afternoon.  Mail has started backing up in the active queue on
the front end PostFix servers.  After poking around a little bit, I found
that there has been an error message that SpamAssassin is writing to the
maillog ever since this issue has started happening.  Here is an example:

"Nov    7 10:26:53 spamassassin1 spamd[15117]: SIGPIPE received - reopening
log socket"

        It seems like SpamAssassin processes a couple of messages, one of
these errors is logged, then there is a period of inactivity.  SpamAssassin
processes a few more of the messages, once of these errors is logged, then
there is a period of inactivity.  Lather, rinse, repeat.  I have seen in the
archives some mention of memory issues, but I have plenty of RAM (2GB
installed on the system - only about 330MB which is being used).  I have
also seen some mention of some of the external tests which SpamAssassin runs
causing this problem, but I have disabled those by using the "--local" flag
when starting spamd.
        Does anyone have any clue as to what may be causing this issue and
how I can fix it?

XOR



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Reply via email to