Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
Robert theres a patch (well two actually) that help for 3.01 and 3.02 here http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3983 does alot of what the 3.10 will do - limits spawning of new processes. -- Martin Hepworth Snr Systems Administrator Solid State Logic Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any memory problems for SA version 3.0.1? We recently upgraded to 2 gigs of memory on the server and SA just gobbled up the memory. We dip down to under 20 megs here and there and 30-40 megs the rest of the time. I lowered the number of processes from 15 to 10 and according to top the RSS is reading at least 50 megs per process. When I stop and start SA I obviously gain back a lot of memory, but soon goes back down. Im running this on Fedora Core 2 with qmail, I average 25-35 emails a minute with spikes to 300 emails a minute. I just dont know if SA is suppose to take up that much memory. Any suggestions on what to look for? Or is there like a memory leak in this version? Thanks Robert Bartlett Digital Phoenix ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean. **
Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
Thanks for the response. Yes it is: --max-conn-per-child=number I set it to 20. Will see how it works. Default is 200. Thanks again for the help. I will look into the upgrade to 3.0.2. Thanks again! Robert > -m10 is 10 max children. In 3.x each child gets reused more than once > before it is thrown away to reduce overhead of startup/shutdown. However, > this has the drawback that if a child sucks up a lot of memory doing one > spam, it has that memory until it goes away. By default that is a pretty > long time (measured in number of mails processed). Cutting down the > number > of mails processed by each child before it restarts gets the memory > returned > faster. > > I think the --max_con_per_child goes on the same command line, but I could > be wrong, not having used it myself. You can find it in the wiki or in > the > archives here. Theo has mentioned it frequently if you want to do an > archive search. > > Loren > >
Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
-m10 is 10 max children. In 3.x each child gets reused more than once before it is thrown away to reduce overhead of startup/shutdown. However, this has the drawback that if a child sucks up a lot of memory doing one spam, it has that memory until it goes away. By default that is a pretty long time (measured in number of mails processed). Cutting down the number of mails processed by each child before it restarts gets the memory returned faster. I think the --max_con_per_child goes on the same command line, but I could be wrong, not having used it myself. You can find it in the wiki or in the archives here. Theo has mentioned it frequently if you want to do an archive search. Loren
Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
Are you referring to whats in the spamd line? Currently it is m10 Hmm I thought that was max con per child, so where do I edit that value? Thanks Robert > 3.0.2 is better than 3.0.1 in this regard, so the first thing I'd do is > upgrade. > > That may not be a complete solution, so if you are using spamd, I'd > set ---max_con_per_child to something reasonably low, like 20..50 or so. > > There are still a couple of things that can eat memory and already have > bugs > assigned, so will probably be fixed in a while. But limiting the number > of > connections per spamd child should help a lot. > > Also with spamd, what is the max number of children? With your low email > rate, I'd probably limit the number of children to 4..5 or so, probably no > more than 10. > > Loren > > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8:53 AM > Subject: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1? > > >> Are there any memory problems for SA version 3.0.1? We recently upgraded >> to 2 gigs of memory on the server and SA just gobbled up the memory. We >> dip down to under 20 megs here and there and 30-40 megs the rest of the >> time. I lowered the number of processes from 15 to 10 and according to >> top >> the RSS is reading at least 50 megs per process. >> >> When I stop and start SA I obviously gain back a lot of memory, but soon >> goes back down. Im running this on Fedora Core 2 with qmail, I average >> 25-35 emails a minute with spikes to 300 emails a minute. I just dont >> know >> if SA is suppose to take up that much memory. >> >> Any suggestions on what to look for? Or is there like a memory leak in >> this version? >> >> Thanks >> Robert Bartlett >> Digital Phoenix > >
Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
3.0.2 is better than 3.0.1 in this regard, so the first thing I'd do is upgrade. That may not be a complete solution, so if you are using spamd, I'd set ---max_con_per_child to something reasonably low, like 20..50 or so. There are still a couple of things that can eat memory and already have bugs assigned, so will probably be fixed in a while. But limiting the number of connections per spamd child should help a lot. Also with spamd, what is the max number of children? With your low email rate, I'd probably limit the number of children to 4..5 or so, probably no more than 10. Loren - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8:53 AM Subject: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1? > Are there any memory problems for SA version 3.0.1? We recently upgraded > to 2 gigs of memory on the server and SA just gobbled up the memory. We > dip down to under 20 megs here and there and 30-40 megs the rest of the > time. I lowered the number of processes from 15 to 10 and according to top > the RSS is reading at least 50 megs per process. > > When I stop and start SA I obviously gain back a lot of memory, but soon > goes back down. Im running this on Fedora Core 2 with qmail, I average > 25-35 emails a minute with spikes to 300 emails a minute. I just dont know > if SA is suppose to take up that much memory. > > Any suggestions on what to look for? Or is there like a memory leak in > this version? > > Thanks > Robert Bartlett > Digital Phoenix
Re: Memory problems with SA 3.0.1?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Are there any memory problems for SA version 3.0.1? We recently upgraded > to 2 gigs of memory on the server and SA just gobbled up the memory. We > dip down to under 20 megs here and there and 30-40 megs the rest of the > time. I lowered the number of processes from 15 to 10 and according to top > the RSS is reading at least 50 megs per process. > > When I stop and start SA I obviously gain back a lot of memory, but soon > goes back down. Im running this on Fedora Core 2 with qmail, I average > 25-35 emails a minute with spikes to 300 emails a minute. I just dont know > if SA is suppose to take up that much memory. > > Any suggestions on what to look for? Or is there like a memory leak in > this version? couple of things: - - recent versions of linux (most 2.4.x kernels in Fedora Core, and all 2.6.* kernels) report "shared" incorrectly in ps and top output, only counting the pages loaded from shared libs instead of the pages actually being shared by the kernel. In fact, quite a bit more memory is being shared. check list archives for details. - - SpamAssassin 3.1.0 will include an Apache-style preforking system, which is more sensible in its use of RAM -- it'll only start a minimum number of processes, attempts to keep a small number of those procs active to minimize paging, and kills off servers that aren't being used. In the meantime, I'd suggest lowering the number of spamd processes being used. - --j. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFB7V0eMJF5cimLx9ARAlThAKCSnhA0vCzLIPEoG/vptvbIew5seQCgkUgD /VRM5IEzl1oxejf0Jon6O20= =kb/0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
