RE: spamd SIGCHLD
Thanks Bowie, It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE? Thanks Jose Luis Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500 From: bowie_bai...@buc.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: Dear Sir, Some additional data. I am running debugging and got these messages: @40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III @40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 3 @40004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing, too many idle children (3 2), killed 13018 @40004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited @40004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 4 @40004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD @40004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection @40004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II Any comments? This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly as new children are created and old children are removed. -- Bowie _ Discover the new Windows Vista http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vistamkt=en-USform=QBRE
RE: spamd SIGCHLD
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE? Not just to make the SIGCHLD warnings go away. The decision is based on your email volume and available resources (CPU, RAM, etc.) Take a look at your memory allocation and swap usage. If your server is not running near its load limit, sure, add some more child processes. When you start hitting swap, or otherwise start seeing performance degradation, take a few off. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 --- Gun Control enables genocide while doing little to reduce crime. --- 34 days since President Obama won the Nobel Not George W. Bush prize
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500 From: bowie_bai...@buc.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly as new children are created and old children are removed. -- Bowie Thanks Bowie, It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE? That depends on your mail flow and how much RAM you have on the machine. If your mail is going through without any delays, then you should probably leave it as-is. Generally the maximum setting is more interesting than the minimum in any case. -- Bowie
RE: spamd SIGCHLD
Dear John, Thanks, now I have the concept more clear about this. Jose Luis I'm more clear about this. Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:39:08 -0800 From: jhar...@impsec.org To: users@spamassassin.apache.org CC: bowie_bai...@buc.com Subject: RE: spamd SIGCHLD On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE? Not just to make the SIGCHLD warnings go away. The decision is based on your email volume and available resources (CPU, RAM, etc.) Take a look at your memory allocation and swap usage. If your server is not running near its load limit, sure, add some more child processes. When you start hitting swap, or otherwise start seeing performance degradation, take a few off. -- John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 --- Gun Control enables genocide while doing little to reduce crime. --- 34 days since President Obama won the Nobel Not George W. Bush prize _ Explore the seven wonders of the world http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+worldmkt=en-USform=QBRE
RE: spamd SIGCHLD
Dear Bowie, I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP. Thanks Jose Luis Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:42:36 -0500 From: bowie_bai...@buc.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500 From: bowie_bai...@buc.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly as new children are created and old children are removed. -- Bowie Thanks Bowie, It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE? That depends on your mail flow and how much RAM you have on the machine. If your mail is going through without any delays, then you should probably leave it as-is. Generally the maximum setting is more interesting than the minimum in any case. -- Bowie _ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=createwx_url=/friends.aspxmkt=en-us
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP. grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs do you need. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Due to unexpected conditions Windows 2000 will be released in first quarter of year 1901
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP. On 12.11.09 16:34, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs do you need. Ops, child of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need many spare spamd's. And your memory status is important to limit the maximum number of spamd's, not spare spamd's. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Your mouse has moved. Windows NT will now restart for changes to take to take effect. [OK]
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: Ops, child of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need many spare spamd's. I see things like: spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child (based on a sort -u of the current maillog) -- Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: Ops, child of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need many spare spamd's. On 12.11.09 09:58, LuKreme wrote: I see things like: spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child (based on a sort -u of the current maillog) If you do this over all week, you can safely restrict max number of spamd processes to 5. If you have enough of memory, you can use higher number but you surely don't need more then default values for max-spare (2) and min-spare (1) spamd processes -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. It's now safe to throw off your computer.
RE: spamd SIGCHLD
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
Thanks Bowie,
It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
Thanks
Jose Luis
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
From: bowie_bai...@buc.com
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
Dear Sir,
Some additional data.
I am running debugging and got these messages:
@40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
@40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
Jose,
One other way to deal with this would be to change the spamd process
model. I had similar issues on my spamd setup and changing to the round
robin proces model (similar to the Apache v2 approach) took care of
it. Try using the --round-robin spamd argument.
You may want to experiment with the -m and --max-conn-per-child
options to fine-tune it.
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.eduCollege of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_adminIowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include std_disclaimer.h
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
On 12-Nov-2009, at 10:12, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child (based on a sort -u of the current maillog) If you do this over all week, you can safely restrict max number of spamd processes to 5. If you have enough of memory, you can use higher number but you surely don't need more then default values for max-spare (2) and min-spare (1) spamd processes I guess I just don't understand what these various notes mean. II? BB? BBSI? -- And there were all the stars, looking remarkably like powered diamonds spilled on black velvet, the stars that lured and ultimately called the boldest towards them... --Colour of Magic
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
L == LuKreme krem...@kreme.com writes: L I guess I just don't understand what these various notes mean. II? L BB? BBSI? lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SpamdForkScaling.pm, look for $statestr. I=idle, B=busy, K=killed, E=error, S=starting, Z=GOT_SIGCHLD (probably zombie), ?=anything else. - J
RE: spamd SIGCHLD
Dear Sir, Some additional data. I am running debugging and got these messages: @40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III @40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 3 @40004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing, too many idle children (3 2), killed 13018 @40004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited @40004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 4 @40004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD @40004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection @40004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II Any comments? Thanks Jose Luis From: jolumape...@hotmail.com To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: spamd SIGCHLD Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:49:22 -0500 Dear Sirs, In reviewing log of SA I found that there are many messages of this type: [22109] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 22384 due to SIGCHLD What is causing these messages? SA is installed on the server: ML110 G4 Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz 1GB RAM spamd options: /usr/bin/spamd -v -u vpopmail -m 10 -x -q -s stderr -r /var/run/spamd/spamd.pid -i 172.16.10.20 -A 172.16.10.0/24 21 | \ Thanks Jose Luis Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more! _ Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=createwx_url=/friends.aspxmkt=en-us
Re: spamd SIGCHLD
Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote: Dear Sir, Some additional data. I am running debugging and got these messages: @40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III @40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 3 @40004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing, too many idle children (3 2), killed 13018 @40004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited @40004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 4 @40004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD @40004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580 @40004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection @40004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II Any comments? This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly as new children are created and old children are removed. -- Bowie
