On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:03:48 +0100 RW wrote:
> > Hello list! > > I'm playing with options min-spare,max-spare,min-children and > > max-children, I'd like to save memory on my vps. So I'd like to have > > one children awaiting for connection from MTA, when MTA receives > > more emials in short time I'd like SA to spawn more children > > (max-children=6). I thinks it's enough to have zero (or one) spare > > children in my case. I'm starting spamd with such parameters: > > ... --min-spare=0 --max-spare=1 -m 6 > > You can't use min-spare less than 1, if you do it gets adjusted to 1. > > spamd only adjusts the number of children when it's out of bounds. If > you had min-spare=0 then a state with no spare children would be in > bounds and there would be no mechanism to increase the number of > children. On reading you your question more thoroughly I see that your main point was that you aren't getting as many processes as expected. The number of child processes isn't adjusted immediately, it's incremented or decremented when a child announces that it is idle. Testing with only six calls isn't enough to expect sensible results. What you need to do is hammer spamd with lots more spamc calls and watch the number of child processes evolve in real time - maybe have the background processes log the child count as each spamc process completes.
