On 2025-03-06 11:27:52, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
[...]
> Hello,
>
> For the sake of clarity I am waiting for transitional freeze to update all
> mailman3 packages as any py3 transition so far broke a lot of things.
>
> In parallel I started to dive a bit in this Xapian matter. Using mu, I agr
Hello,
> On 5 Mar 2025, at 21:32, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>
> On 2025-02-24 11:51:16, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>> On 2025-02-24 15:56:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> So, has this solved it all for good for you guys? What release of xapian
>>> are you on?
>>
>> In the end, no, not r
De : Michael Tremer
À : Antoine Beaupré
Cc : 1014...@bugs.debian.org; Pierre-Elliott Bécue ; Peter
Chubb
Date : 6 mars 2025 11:21:38
Objet : Re: Bug#1014037: mailman3-web: Possible memory leak: uwsgi OOMs after a
few weeks
> Hello,
>
>> On 5 Mar 2025, at 21:32, Antoine Be
On 2025-02-24 11:51:16, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> On 2025-02-24 15:56:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> So, has this solved it all for good for you guys? What release of xapian are
>> you on?
>
> In the end, no, not really. Things have *improved*: we used to have 4-5
> OOM/day, with peaks at
On 2025-02-24 17:51:17, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Hello Antoine,
>
>> On 24 Feb 2025, at 16:51, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
[...]
>> So, TL;DR: improved, but not fixed. I suspect we had a multi-dimensional
>> issue, of which search/whoosh *was* a part of, because we would see a
>> huge increase in OOMs
Hello Antoine,
> On 24 Feb 2025, at 16:51, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>
> On 2025-02-24 15:56:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> So, has this solved it all for good for you guys? What release of xapian are
>> you on?
>
> In the end, no, not really. Things have *improved*: we used to have 4
On 2025-02-24 15:56:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
[...]
> So, has this solved it all for good for you guys? What release of xapian are
> you on?
In the end, no, not really. Things have *improved*: we used to have 4-5
OOM/day, with peaks at 15, 120 when reindexing, and this is down to 1-5
a day, dep
Hello,
Apologies for my late reply.
> On 7 Feb 2025, at 03:12, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>
> On 2025-01-16 09:40:05, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>>> I would be interested to hear what you are making of this all.
>>
>> Clearly there's a memory leak in this implementation as well, but we'll
>> know bett
On 2025-02-06 22:12:28, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
> I'm in the process of switching to Xapian now. This brings a whole lot
> of other issues (it uses more disk space and there's a bug in the
> xapian-haystack library that crashes indexing, see #), but so far, we've
> completely cleared out any OOM err
On 2025-01-15 10:04:54, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
[...]
> This thread on the upstream mailman mailing list mentions people don't
> have this kind of problem with gunicorn:
>
> https://lists.mailman3.org/archives/list/mailman-us...@mailman3.org/thread/QCTB7Y6W7I7GDRCIJKFNEVQB7DSNC4WG/
>
> So I'm temp
On 2025-01-16 10:20:56, Michael Tremer wrote:
> Good morning everyone,
>
> I ran the machine now with a total of 16 GiB - no other modifications have
> been made.
>
> Since then, the Apache process consumed the entirety of memory (minus the
> other basic system services) and was killed by the OOM
On 2025-01-15 16:13:44, Michael Tremer wrote:
[...]
> Apache is absolutely the biggest user of the memory and I considered that
> amount illegitimate.
For the record, I absolutely agree.
>> But yeah, your numbers might show there's actually an underlying issue
>> with mailman-web itself. Our t
On 2025-01-15 15:56:27, Michael Tremer wrote:
[...]
>>> I would be happy to hear if running mailman3 in Gunicorn resolves the
>>> problem, but maybe it is just a coincidence that the problem doesn’t appear
>>> there?
>>
>> It could be! If you could show us OOM dmesg logs, they should show whic
On 2025-01-15 15:18:21, Michael Tremer wrote:
> I am running mailman3-web in Apache with mod_wsgi and I also have the same
> memory usage problem. Therefore I thought it was a mailman3 problem rather
> than in the application that is hosting it.
Have you pinned down exactly *what* process is eat
Hello everyone,
> On 15 Jan 2025, at 15:04, Antoine Beaupré wrote:
>
> Control: tags -1 -moreinfo
>
> On 2024-04-25 01:59:07, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> Peter Chubb wrote on 29/06/2022 at 03:11:15+0200:
>
> [...]
>
>> Having the same kind of setup for the past 6 years, I never had such a
> "Pierre-Elliott" == Pierre-Elliott Bécue writes:
Pierre-Elliott> Having the same kind of setup for the past 6 years, I
Pierre-Elliott> never had such an issue.
Since increasing the size of the VM and the last Mailman3 upgrade, I
haven't seen the issue.
--
Dr Peter Chubb
Control: tags -1 +moreinfo
Hi,
Peter Chubb wrote on 29/06/2022 at 03:11:15+0200:
> Package: mailman3-web
> Version: 0+20200530-2
> Severity: normal
>
> Dear Maintainer,
>
> I have a mailman3 system backed by PostGRES, exim4, and nginx;
> and it is set up and works properly. However, the uws
Hi,
I'm pretty sure I'm seeing this too. I'm running it under apache2
and with mariadb.
After a week or so uwsgi was using about 7% RAM on an 8G machine. I
restarted mailman3-web and that went back to 1%. One day later it is
up to 1.2%; I guess it will keep growing and I will also have to
regular
Package: mailman3-web
Version: 0+20200530-2
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
I have a mailman3 system backed by PostGRES, exim4, and nginx;
and it is set up and works properly. However, the uwsgi process
keeps growing and growing until the system OOMs. typically
after two to three weeks.
19 matches
Mail list logo
