Hi!
Today we turned of Spamdyke to see if it makes our e-mail server more
stable. The server is running a plain, up-to-date CentOS 5.3 with
SpamDyke 4.0.10 and Qmail from Qmailtoaster/Qmailtoaster Plus.
What we are seeing is 100+ hanging Spamdyke processing and
corresponding defunct qmail-smtpd c
Hi Hans,
I had the same problem in the past and ended up that my real problem was the
dns-resolver.
With a working dnscache all my problems with where gone.
Jm2c
Andreas
Am Thursday 25 February 2010 11:47:01 schrieb Hans F. Nordhaug:
> Hi!
>
> Today we turned of Spamdyke to see if it makes our
I assuming that with "the same problem" you are referring to a
slow/unstable server, and not the hanging SpamDyke processes?
No matter what the problem is, I don't think there should be
SpamDyke processes hanging around.
Hans
* Andreas Galatis [2010-02-25]:
> Hi Hans,
>
> I had the same probl
Hi Hans,
I did not receive your answer, just got it from the archive now.
you're right, the server was unstable/slow and i had hanging SpamDyke
processes.
Since DNS-resolver is ok, I have a stable server and no hanging processes.
Shure, SpamDyke should end processes, even when the resolver doesn'
If this happens again, would you mind using strace to see where spamdyke
is stuck? It would be very helpful to know as much as possible so I can
try to figure out what's happening.
-- Sam Clipipnger
On 2/26/10 1:23 AM, Andreas Galatis wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> I did not receive your answer, just got
I'm running several QMT servers with spamdyke, and am now of the opinion
that there's a bug in spamdyke. All are running v4.0.10. Also, I believe
that DNS resolution is configured and working properly in all cases
(local caching DNS, forwarding to root servers), so that should not be
an issue.
> I'm running several QMT servers with spamdyke, and am now of the opinion
> that there's a bug in spamdyke. All are running v4.0.10. Also, I believe
> that DNS resolution is configured and working properly in all cases
> (local caching DNS, forwarding to root servers), so that should not be
> an
|
|> I'm running several QMT servers with spamdyke, and am now of the opinion
|> that there's a bug in spamdyke. All are running v4.0.10. Also, I believe
|> that DNS resolution is configured and working properly in all cases
|> (local caching DNS, forwarding to root servers), so that should not be
Greg Cirino wrote:
> |
> |> I'm running several QMT servers with spamdyke, and am now of the opinion
> |> that there's a bug in spamdyke. All are running v4.0.10. Also, I believe
> |> that DNS resolution is configured and working properly in all cases
> |> (local caching DNS, forwarding to root ser
Quoting "Eric Shubert" :
>
>
> On a high volume server, defunct processes are much more frequent. They
> all appear to be sessions with a spamdyke:TIMEOUT message, although
> there are also many TIMEOUTs which do not result in defunct processes.
> The defunct sessions vary as to the type of rejec
t...@uncon.org wrote:
> Quoting "Eric Shubert" :
>
>
>>
>> On a high volume server, defunct processes are much more frequent. They
>> all appear to be sessions with a spamdyke:TIMEOUT message, although
>> there are also many TIMEOUTs which do not result in defunct processes.
>> The defunct sessio
11 matches
Mail list logo
