I'd have to defer to Dairenn on that. But the question makes me uneasy :P -----Original Message----- From: Eric Shubert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 3:03 PM To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] spamd (spamc)?
I wonder then how the system can have run out of sockets. Is something besides the toaster using spamd? How many spamd processes are typically running at once? Inquiring minds want to know. ;) Bobby Tyner wrote: > We are running the stock 100, Eric. > > Bobby Tyner > Systems Administrator > > BroadSpire, Inc. > www.PingWorx.com | www.BroadSpire.com | > 617 W. 7th Street., Ste. 601. Los Angeles, CA 90017 > phone: 213.986.1050 | Fax: 213.688.7791 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Shubert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 6:35 PM > To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com > Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] spamd (spamc)? > > Dairenn Lombard wrote: >> Looks like I figured out the real reason. >> >> The server was running out of sockets. It looks like the default is to >> have up to 256 different instances of port 783 connections via 127.0.0.1 >> - I've switched spamd/spamc over to using a Unix socket instead, and >> this has fixed the problem. >> > > Are you running more than the stock 100 concurrencyincoming sessions? > How many are you running? > -- -Eric 'shubes' --------------------------------------------------------------------- QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
