Some mail seems to hog spamd process

Hi. Since yesterday I am having problem with spamd processes hogging cpu. All is fine until suddenly spamd keeps using 95% cpu forever. I noticed that bayes.lock also contains the pid of the hogging process. After some minutes I kill the pid and removes bayes.lock by hand, but it only takes a

Re: Some mail seems to hog spamd process

I have completely missed the recent thread "SA increasing load average a lot and spams getting through", which seems to reflect exactly the same problem I'm having. For completeness I use SA 3.1.5 and haven't changed any cf the last few days. Theres absolute not any high volume of mail. Plenty o

Re: bayes sync is hogging cpu (was: Some mail seems to hog spamd process)

Hi, me again ;) I'm pretty confident that the hogging occurs when SA is trying to sync the bayes. The bayes_journal is cleared exactly when the hogging begins. And when I run sa-learn --sync I get the very same hogging effect. The permissions seems ok, doesn't it? -rw--- 1 spamd wheel

Re: sa-learn question

Russell Jones wrote: > If I have multiple sa-learn processes going at the same time, can that > corrupt the database and/or cause some other problem that I don't want > to happen? Or is it safe to have the following in crontab for example: > > @daily sa-learn --spam > /home/eggycrew/imap/eggycrew

Re: Problem with user_white_list

Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 04:01:20AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > The moral here is NEVER use whitelist_from. >>> ...does this indicate that whitelist_from should be obsoleted? >>> >> should, yes.. will be, probably not. >> > > Well, there i

Re: Problem with user_white_list

On Sat, September 23, 2006 15:20, Matt Kettler wrote: > Also, I personally view ANY spamassassin whitelisting feature as a > measure of last resort. It's generally better to whitelist by > configuring your tools to not call SA in the first place. You have more > reliable envelope information, AND

Assign a score to a tflag

Title: Assign a score to a tflag Hello, I have integrate some spamassassin rule (copied from /usr/share/spamassassin) in order to use some blacklists in the world. As example i copied this rule: header RCVD_IN_SBL  eval:check_rbl_sub('sblxbl', '127.0.0.2') describe RCVD_IN_S

Re: SA increasing load average a lot and spams getting through

On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 10:44:11AM -0700, John Goubeaux wrote: > you might also want to check: > > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.1.x/dist/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html#miscellaneous_options > > eg lock_method I had the same bayes files errors and set this to > lock_method flock an

Re: Assign a score to a tflag

Assign a score to a tflag> header RCVD_IN_SBL eval:check_rbl_sub('sblxbl', '127.0.0.2') describe RCVD_IN_SBLReceived via a relay in Spamhaus SBL tflags RCVD_IN_SBL net Is there a way, automatically, to assign a score (as example 20.0 so it is automatically detected as

Re: Any plugins that scan looking for phone numbers? (URICountry)

It looks like I get by the URICountry plugin but I have a question about that. why does it use IP::Country::Fast instead of IP::Country::Medium since it's not doing the lookup by ip but by URI which is by name more often than ip address. On Sep 22, 2006, at 7:53 PM, Robert Nicholson wrote

Re: Problem with user_white_list

Matt Kettler wrote: Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 04:01:20AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: The moral here is NEVER use whitelist_from. ...does this indicate that whitelist_from should be obsoleted? should, yes.. will be, probably no

RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID

2.2 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on invalid IP block [65.119.30.206 listed in combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com] I just got an order confirmation from Newegg and it got a big score boost of 2.2 from this rule. What does this rule mean? I ran the address t

Re: RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID

On Saturday 23 September 2006 22:50, Kenneth Porter took the opportunity to say: > 2.2 RCVD_IN_WHOIS_INVALID RBL: CompleteWhois: sender on invalid IP block >[65.119.30.206 listed in > combined-HIB.dnsiplists.completewhois.com] > > I just got an order confirmation from Newegg and it g

[off-topic] Recommended Commercial DNS Services?

Recommended Commercial DNS Services?   I’m looking for suggestions for reliable outsourced DNS services where the servers aren’t overloaded, the prices are reasonable, and the service & control panels are tops.   Any suggestions?   Rob McEwen PowerView Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED]  

SA gone mad, times out and stucks

Hello! I'm running Exim together with spamc/spamd on my box for months now without problems. But a week ago many spams begun to show up in my Inbox, so I investigated what's wrong. Until recently most spamd.log entries looked like this: info: spamd: got connection over /var/run/spamd.sock info: s

Re: Assign a score to a tflag

From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Assign a score to a tflag> header RCVD_IN_SBL eval:check_rbl_sub('sblxbl', '127.0.0.2') describe RCVD_IN_SBLReceived via a relay in Spamhaus SBL tflags RCVD_IN_SBL net Is there a way, automatically, to assign a score (as exampl

Re: Problem with user_white_list

Benny Pedersen wrote: > On Sat, September 23, 2006 15:20, Matt Kettler wrote: > >> Also, I personally view ANY spamassassin whitelisting feature as a >> measure of last resort. It's generally better to whitelist by >> configuring your tools to not call SA in the first place. You have more >> rel

unsubscribe

unsubscribe

Re: unsubscribe

At 08:43 PM 9/23/2006, Chris Mills (Chrysalis) wrote: unsubscribe list-unsubscribe:

Re: SA gone mad, times out and stucks

warn: bayes: expire_old_tokens: child processing timeout at /usr/sbin/spamd line 1086. (Spamd then takes very long to scan a mail: info: spamd: clean message (0.0/5.0) for Debian-exim:106 in 305.0 seconds, 3781 bytes.) The child is trying to run a Bayes expire, apparently on a large Bayes datab

Re: SA gone mad, times out and stucks

From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> warn: bayes: expire_old_tokens: child processing timeout at /usr/sbin/spamd line 1086. (Spamd then takes very long to scan a mail: info: spamd: clean message (0.0/5.0) for Debian-exim:106 in 305.0 seconds, 3781 bytes.) The child is trying to run a Bayes

Re: bayes sync is hogging cpu

Ok, more information here. I found in spamd.log this line when the problem started: Fri Sep 22 19:55:22 2006 [74581] warn: bayes: expire_old_tokens: child processing timeout at /usr/local/bin/spamd line 1082 which was followed by lots of these: Fri Sep 22 19:55:52 2006 [74581] warn: bayes: can