So if I understand correctly, you turned on full logging and your clients started seeing spamdyke's excessive output in their SMTP sessions? Yikes! I'll go through the code tonight to see if I can figure out what might cause that.
-- Sam Clippinger Arthur Girardi wrote: > Hi > > I too noticed the high cpu usage by spamdyke in the 4.0.5 version. > Like 6 or 7 spamdyke processes running at 100% cpu on a dual > quad-core... > > Interesting enough, I noticed not all spamdyke did go 100%, only those > that had some kind of attachment, a gif, jpg, a signature, whatever, > encoded in base64. The message does finish successfully and life goes > on, but I started having some slowdown complaints, and after this > first post to the list, I saw I had the same issue. > > If you strace the process while it is hanging at high cpu, you'll see > a lot of Timeouts mixed with reads and writes of what seems to be the > content of the base64 attachment. > > Then I tried changing output from my normal verbose operation to > excessive, and enabled full-log-dir, but just as I did that, cpu usage > fell down, and clients started getting smtp error messages containing > chunks of spamdyke's excessive output. > > I'm running spamdyke on a rhel5. > > Cheers > > Arthur > > Citando Paulo Henrique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> Hi... >> >> 2008/10/14 Sam Clippinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >>> This is the first I've heard of this -- can you provide any more >>> information about it? Did those spamdyke processes produce any log >>> messages or errors? >>> >> No errors. >> >> >> Did they begin eating the CPU before or after >> >>> accepting/rejecting a message? >>> >> Apparently once the message is accepted. >> >> >> Did you try turning on full logging to >> >>> see exactly what was going on? >>> >> Yet I did not. >> >> What OS are you running? >> >> Linux Slackware 12.1, kernel 2.6.24-5-smp >> >> >> tks. >> >>> -- Sam Clippinger >>> >>> Erald Troja wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I second your findings. >>>> >>>> We reverted to 4.0.4 right away. >>>> Did not report it as we were unable >>>> to find a good explanation for it. >>>> >>>> The spamdyke processes were just lingering each consuming >>>> between 70% to 100% of CPU. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------ >>>> Erald Troja >>>> >>>> >>>> Paulo Henrique wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> since the spamdyke upgraded to 4.0.5, I noted that my servers working >>>>> with a high load, the average of 0.65 and they were left to 3.5, >>>>> someone noticed this problem? What may be happening? >>>>> >>>>> tks >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> spamdyke-users mailing list >>>> spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org >>>> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> spamdyke-users mailing list >>> spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org >>> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users >>> >>> >> >> -- >> "Muitos homens perdem a saúde para ganhar dinheiro, depois perdem o >> dinheiro para ganhar a saúde. - Confúcio" >> >> Paulo Henrique Fonseca >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> _______________________________________________ >> spamdyke-users mailing list >> spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org >> http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > spamdyke-users mailing list > spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org > http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users > _______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
