-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Zbigniew Szalbot wrote: > Hi Bill and all, > >>> So I am wondering it it is OK for me to limit the spamd user to how much >>> CPU power it can get? I saw in the Handbook that it is possible to limit >>> resources per user. Do you think it is a good thing to do? Will I be >> better >>> off limiting spamd user or will it make the situation worse because SA >>> will/may choke? Many thanks for any advice you can give me. I really >>> appreciate it! >> The most typical method of handling this would be nice(1) (see the man >> page for details). > > Thanks - I will do some reading. > >> Also, I'm not clear as to what problem you're tyring to solve. High load >> on a busy server certainly isn't a problem, so where is the problem? > > The problem that sometimes, though for a very short period of time, the > load goes above 14.
The load is roughly a combination of resources programs are waiting for, and that doesn't necessarily have to be CPU cycles, but something else could be your bottleneck, like disk IO. I suggest finding the real problem. You could throttle sendmail (or any MTA) a bit by lowering the point where it starts temp-failing email (with an 450), but that's just a workaround. Peter -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGshfVrvsez6l/SvARAhFqAJ955u+eRhRs5Mu4yHXLg4oemX/sUQCfYqCG lul2O+hkyEyohYSwXDrZjxY= =WNLx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"