Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: could not acquire qrunner lock, etc (partially solved)

2001-05-02 Thread Mike Crowe
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 12:14:44AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote: On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 09:09:38PM +0100, Mike Crowe wrote: [stuff about the archiver being slow] Yep, this is known, I've had the same problem on several servers, including sourceforge.net, which only has 2G of memory a dual

Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: could not acquire qrunner lock, etc

2001-04-28 Thread Mike Crowe
=' ') --- break I hope my understanding of this problem is correct and the above information is useful. I don't think I've got to the bottom of the CPU usage problem, but this was certainly part of it. -- Mike Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: could not acquire qrunner lock, etc (partially solved)

2001-04-28 Thread Mike Crowe
, in summary, a P133 with 96Mb of RAM is not up to running even a relatively low volume list (50 messages per day) when ARCHIVE_TO_MBOX is set to 2. :-) -- Mike Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http

Re: [Mailman-Users] Re: could not acquire qrunner lock, etc

2001-04-25 Thread Mike Crowe
on multiple domains. My exim.conf does not contain recipients_max so the default value of zero is being used. TBH I'd like to just go back to Mailman 1 at this point but I'm worried that the database files will be incompatible. -- Mike Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED

[Mailman-Users] Re: could not acquire qrunner lock, etc

2001-04-24 Thread Mike Crowe
list or owned by root, group list with g+rwX permissions. I tried putting some extra logging in the qrunner script but wasn't really sure what I was looking at. If someone can advise me where it would be best to log then I am willing to hack the scripts a bit. TIA -- Mike Crowe [EMAIL PROTECTED