W dniu 30.03.2011 12:33, Daniel Lemke pisze: > You mean something like --timeout-child=secs as a spamd starting option? ;) > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.3.x/doc/spamd.html
Thanks for quick reply! This option doesn't work as i wish ;) spamd child isn't killing after time set in --timeout-child, it is working, and working and utilizes 100% CPU until i send kill signal. It seems for me this option works as described below: (for this example --timeout-child=10 sec) 0s - i'm starting scanning mail with spamc [...] - spamd child havy works with mail 10s - spamd child still works and uses 100% of cpu 20s - spamd child still works and uses 100% of cpu 30s - spamd child finished scanning, it ends his work, in this moment spamc gets answer from daemon: 0.0 TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED Exceeded time limit / deadline So, if child doesn't end in time definied in timeout-child it means that result of spamd child's work will not be usedby spamd. But spamd still doesn't return "time_limit" after timeout-child pass, it waits for something (cpu is free), and spamc waits for nothing (spamc should now get "time_limit" imho). This is new question, why spamd doesn't return "time_limit" immediately when timeout-child occurs? # ps x|grep spamd 29513 ? SNs 0:12 /usr/sbin/spamd -d -r /var/run/spamd.pid --min-spare=2 --max-spare=4 -m 5 -i 127.0.0.1 -x -q -u nobody -l --timeout-child=10 # time spamc -s 3344444 -R < 1297332681.M942138P14806.poczta\,S\=1557593\,W\=1608807 0.0/5.9 [cut X-info] X-Szczegoly:(poczta.cibet.pl)(0.0 points) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------- 0.0 TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED Exceeded time limit / deadline real 0m24.851s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.010s 24 seconds was time how long spamd child was working on test email. P.S. Yes, i'm using new version of SA, 3.3.1 ;)
