My first thought was Outlook - but that thought didn't last long. I had
them in Webmail. My load has fallen some since adding spamdyke. This
server is very small. Very few users on 2 domains. I mean less than 100
accts.
Here is the header from the email you sent:
Return-Path:
<qmailtoaster-list-return-5432-sales=magicwisp....@qmailtoaster.com>
Delivered-To: sa...@magicwisp.com
Received: (qmail 27045 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2010 15:53:12 -0000
DomainKey-Status: no signature
Received: by simscan 1.4.0 ppid: 27021, pid: 27023, t: 22.7157s
scanners: attach: 1.4.0 spam: 3.2.5
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on
mail.magicwisp.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=3.5 tests=AWL,HTML_MESSAGE,RDNS_NONE,
SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1 autolearn=disabled version=3.2.5
Received: from unknown (HELO mail.qmailtoaster.com) (216.81.238.95)
by mail.magicwisp.com with SMTP; 21 Feb 2010 15:52:49 -0000
Received-SPF: pass (mail.magicwisp.com: SPF record at qmailtoaster.com
designates 216.81.238.95 as permitted sender)
Received: (qmail 13921 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2010 15:52:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact qmailtoaster-list-h...@qmailtoaster.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com>
List-Help: <mailto:qmailtoaster-list-h...@qmailtoaster.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:qmailtoaster-list-unsubscr...@qmailtoaster.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:qmailtoaster-list-subscr...@qmailtoaster.com>
Reply-To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Delivered-To: mailing list qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Received: (qmail 13914 invoked by uid 89); 21 Feb 2010 15:52:07 -0000
Message-ID: <4b8156a3.3050...@qmailtoaster.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:52:03 -0500
From: Jake Vickers <j...@qmailtoaster.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7)
Gecko/20100120 Fedora/3.0.1-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
References: <00c801cab2ac$4c047500$e40d5f...@com>
In-Reply-To: <00c801cab2ac$4c047500$e40d5f...@com>
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Optimizing a Server for VM
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 9.0.733 [271.1.1/2701]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=======AVGMAIL-6B6462F5======="
That scantime is without ClamAV. I am currently trying to figure out what
SpamAssassin Rules really need to be in place, and where they all are. LOL.
I had one email come in this morning that showed this:
2010-02-21 08:38:26.258036500 [2996] info: spamd: result: Y 7 -
SARE_MONEYTERMS,URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_GREY
scantime=299.8,size=97584,user=clamav,uid=89,required_score=3.5,rhost=localh
ost.localdomain,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=41208,mid=<0.0.0.4.1CAB2F5E480DCE4.484
3...@mail1.po155.com>,autolearn=unavailable
2010-02-21 08:53:38.010300500 [2996] info: spamd: result: Y 6 -
URIBL_BLACK,URIBL_GREY
scantime=300.3,size=97584,user=clamav,uid=89,required_score=3.5,rhost=localh
ost.localdomain,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=39344,mid=<0.0.0.4.1CAB2F5E480DCE4.484
3...@mail1.po155.com>,autolearn=unavailable
As you can see, it was spam, and the thing blew my processors through the
roof. I wasn't looking at it right then, and don't have any graphing setup
on them (not sure if there is something out there that would be easily
setup), but the scantimes went crazy so it came in more than once. I added
that domain to spamdykes blacklist, so it should be gone J.
I have seen my load on the VM go as high as 22 on the 1min avg. That is
insane.
Right now they are looking great -
10:36:35 up 16:17, 3 users, load average: 0.58, 0.58, 0.61
The physical machine is always pretty good with the most I have seen on the
one min avg at about 1.5 to 1.8.
From: Jake Vickers [mailto:j...@qmailtoaster.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 9:52 AM
To: qmailtoaster-list@qmailtoaster.com
Subject: Re: [qmailtoaster] Optimizing a Server for VM
On 02/20/2010 11:13 PM, MagicWISP Sales wrote:
I have a Virtual machine running on an old - and I mean old (Quad Intel
Pentium 4 Xeon) server. My load average is bad on the VM, the physical
machine looks ok. The physical machine is slated to be replaced, but not
for approx 90days. It's causing duplicate emails to come in to users
accounts. Spamdyke is helping a lot. I have killed RBLS in qmail and
Spamassassin, no sense in checking them twice. I have disabled autolearn
and am not using the Bayes database in Spamassassin. I am trying to
optimize simscan, since I see scan times that are pretty bad - the first one
I looked at was 25 seconds. I turned off clam by editing simcontrol to
:clam=no. I am trying to think of any other things I can do to help out
this server in the interim. I found a script that says it does the
following things that make a lot of sense to me:
I'm curious what your load metrics are. I've worked on 5-6 virtual QMTs in
the last couple weeks, and everything seems to fall down around the 500 user
mark (or equivalent load). This has been on ESX, Xen, and ESXi. We had some
discussion on this on the devel list, since this is a little concerning. I
have bare metal machines that have 2200+ users that run without any problem,
and on "low-end" hardware (P4 2.4Ghz, 2G RAM).
Also curious to see if you get the duplicates in webmail as well as lookOut.
I suspect you get them in lookOut but do not see them in webmail.... If
that's the case you can toss out any ideas that spam/virus/simscan are
causing your problems.
