Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-23 Thread Michael Scheidell
On 3/23/11 5:10 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: Michael, I don't think I could follow you. Did you say that these "identical" systems do have different rules? there might be some slight differences in local.cf. thats it. this one is very strange. offlist if you want more details... -- Michael

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-23 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 05:33 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: > 32 systems, exactly the same cpu, step software. only minor differences > would be.. well, not even the exact set of rules. but can re2c randomly > compile something different depending on internal cpu cache? > > only two of them had

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559 (was: Re: __PILL_PRICE Problems)

2011-03-21 Thread John Hardin
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011, jp wrote: I turned off the automatic updating, restored from a recent backup /var/lib/spamassassin/, sa-compiled, and it's working great. I'll wait for word that the stuff distributed via sa-update is fixed. I'd suggest you disable the PILL_PRICE rules as outlined upthrea

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559 (was: Re: __PILL_PRICE Problems)

2011-03-21 Thread jp
Here's an interesting graph of the affect it had on load: http://mc4.midcoast.com/mrtg/load.html Took a while for load to subside after fixing it due to the backlog of email to process. On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 04:12:45PM -0400, jp wrote: > I've had the problem happen starting Sunday morning with

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559 (was: Re: __PILL_PRICE Problems)

2011-03-21 Thread jp
I've had the problem happen starting Sunday morning with an automatic sa-update. (I have until Sunday had it automatically sa-compile and restart after an update) It affected various 64 bit machines; we only use 64 bit OSs on AMD64 quad and hex core machines. I use the Suse factory provided desk

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-21 Thread Michael Scheidell
On 3/20/11 11:33 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: [1] CPU version or rather stepping? not in my instance. freebsd jails are like ibm pseries 'lpars'. not exactly visualization, but chrooted . super chrooted. chrooted users also, root uid is chrooted as well. 32 systems, exactly the same

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-20 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Sun, 2011-03-20 at 23:13 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: > On 3/20/11 8:57 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > > There are now reports, that this bug is not strictly related to 32 bit > > architecture (though always with compiled rules). > > > > Since there have been offers for further testing: One

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-20 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 01:57 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: > Another might be to reproduce the issue, and get a minimal test-case. Just received a reply privately, containing like heaps of information and debugging. Two very noteworthy points it appears to surface. (a) The actual rule that tri

Re: Reproducing Bug 6559

2011-03-20 Thread Michael Scheidell
On 3/20/11 8:57 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: There are now reports, that this bug is not strictly related to 32 bit architecture (though always with compiled rules). Since there have been offers for further testing: One data point is to collect details about systems, CPU architecture, instruct

Reproducing Bug 6559 (was: Re: __PILL_PRICE Problems)

2011-03-20 Thread Karsten Bräckelmann
There are now reports, that this bug is not strictly related to 32 bit architecture (though always with compiled rules). Since there have been offers for further testing: One data point is to collect details about systems, CPU architecture, instruction set used for compiling, versions (OS, kernel,