I suppose that it makes sense to not set WAITFORMAIL to 0, though Harry
posted this morning that his was set that way and working properly.
Personally I would be curious to see what happens if you set it back to
0 and restarted the service sine the other testing didn't seem to make
sense if all was truly the same. This might also be of broader benefit
if something previously unknown was found.
Matt
David Sullivan wrote:
Hello Matt,
Friday, January 13, 2006, 2:04:00 PM, you wrote:
M> Great news. Now Declude can look for a bug in how it handles
M> certainlicense codes and maybe fix this for others. Maybe Markus
M> could trythe same thing.
Ok, I'm not sure why the license code change worked at all. Been on
with Declude and we found the primary issue. Looks like I had
WAITFORMAIL 0 which was causing Declude to hammer the Proc folder
constantly. I checked the processors as you suggested Matt and it was
pounding two virtual processors from 0% to 100% in a perfect mirror to
generate a steady 25% utilization.
Changing WAITFORMAIL to 500 cleared it up nicely.
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA www.declude.com]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
