> "L" == LuKreme writes:
L> I guess I just don't understand what these various notes mean. II?
L> BB? BBSI?
lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SpamdForkScaling.pm, look for $statestr.
I=idle, B=busy, K=killed, E=error, S=starting, Z="GOT_SIGCHLD" (probably
zombie), ?=anything else.
- J<
On 12-Nov-2009, at 10:12, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI
>> spamd[10989]:
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
>
> Thanks Bowie,
>
> It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jose Luis
>
> > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> > From: bowie_bai...@buc.com
> > To: users@s
> On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> > Ops, "child" of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need
> > many spare spamd's.
On 12.11.09 09:58, LuKreme wrote:
> I see things like:
>
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child
On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> Ops, "child" of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need
> many spare spamd's.
I see things like:
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states:
> On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> > I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm
> > monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.
On 12.11.09 16:34, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs
On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm
> monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.
grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs do you
need.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.
Dear Bowie,
I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm
monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.
Thanks
Jose Luis
> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:42:36 -0500
> From: bowie_bai...@buc.com
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject:
Dear John,
Thanks, now I have the concept more clear about this.
Jose Luis
I'm more clear about this.
> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:39:08 -0800
> From: jhar...@impsec.org
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> CC: bowie_bai...@buc.com
> Subject: RE: spamd SIGCHLD
>
>
Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> > From: bowie_bai...@buc.com
> > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
> >
> >
> > This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
Not just to make the SIGCHLD warnings go away. The decision is based on
your email volume and available resources (CPU, RAM, etc.)
Take a look at your memory allocation and swap
Thanks Bowie,
It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
Thanks
Jose Luis
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> From: bowie_bai...@buc.com
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
>
> Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> >
Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> Some additional data.
>
> I am running debugging and got these messages:
>
> @40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
> @40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
> state 3
> @40004afb1ab22375e75c
Dear Sir,
Some additional data.
I am running debugging and got these messages:
@40004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
@40004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 3
@40004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid:
14 matches
Mail list logo