Re: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-06-01 Thread Kai Schaetzl
wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 19:37:54 -0400 (EDT): some under the 5.6.1 site_perl, some under 5.005. Did you notice that you didn't say anything about this earlier? ;-) It seems this is the cause of your problem. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet

3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread up
A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue. I raised max children from 15 to 25, yet it still seems to be spending most of it's time at

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Bowie Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue. I raised max children from 15 to 25, yet it still seems to be

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread up
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Bowie Bailey wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue. I raised max

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Bowie Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006, Bowie Bailey wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Matthew.van.Eerde
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue. Is it possible that you're locking on a Bayes write? Try

Re: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in subtraction (-) at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Locker/UnixNFSSafe.pm line 102, GEN108 line 46. Hrm. That's not good. Seems

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread up
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A couple of days after an upgrade from 3.0.4 to 3.1.2, I'm noticing that it seems alot slower. I turned off most network tests, including DCC, Pyzor and Razor and it still looks like there's an issue. Is it possible

Re: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread up
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in subtraction (-) at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/Mail/SpamAssassin/Locker/UnixNFSSafe.pm line 102,

RE: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Matthew.van.Eerde
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ugh...I have seen some locking errors while I wasn't before. WOuld simply turning off auto-learning accomplish the same thing? Possibly. If it needs to be turned off altogether, will just commenting out bayes_path in local.cf do it? I don't see any other reference

Re: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread up
On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 11:12:03AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May 31 07:53:52 mail spamd[59117]: Use of uninitialized value in subtraction (-) at

Re: 3.1.2 issue with UnixNFSSafe.pm ?

2006-05-31 Thread Justin Mason
Can you get output of strace -f -o trace on the affected processes? (easy way: just stop spamd, then strace the spamd startup script.) --j. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, 31 May 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2006