This is why I tend to hold off a while before applying the monthly hotfixes unless there is an active exploit.  The July one for Windows 2003 relied on having the files to uninstall a very old hotfix (a change in some Australia time zone thing).  I deleted old hotfix uninstall files on all of my servers months ago, and as a result the update would fail every time.  There were lots of postings on support lists all over the place concerning this.  Where Microsoft has reps, they were pretty much mum except to say that they had heard of some having issues.  Then about 25 days later, that hotfix disappeared from my Windows Update queue.  There was never a KB article or nuttin'.

I guess the moral of this story is that you might not find confirmation from Microsoft unless it gets press, and you also probably not see a fix for weeks...if it is their fault.  Uninstalling the most recent hotfixes seems to make a lot of sense.  Keep in mind also that this probably affects more than just <= 4KB images.

Matt



Andy Schmidt wrote:
Hi,

Yes it started around this weekend - and, in our case too, those are small
JPEG/GIF thumbnail images of up to 4K (so probably exactly one allocation
unit).

I've asked my client to intentionally change the compression factor to
create the files slightly larger than 4096 bytes - to see if this theory
holds true.

It's pretty unlikely that no larger files would be effected by a hardware
error, considering that they should have a higher chance to be effected (due
to their larger size).

Are you using an on-access virus scanner? We use McAfee - just trying to
cover every base.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Heimir
Eidskrem
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 06:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files


we are having the exact problem on one of our servers.
We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size.
They work fine at first but later they are corrupted.

Windows 2000 server.

I have no clue what it could be at this time.
It started around this weekend I think.

Please keep me posted if you find something.

H.


Andy Schmidt wrote:
  
Hi,

I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) 
running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1).

Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP 
space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while 
later the data is corrupted.

I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to 
appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 
bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the "correct" data through a 
share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always 
see the byte pattern of 0xDF.

I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure 
enough, it reported and fixed several problems "Windows replaced bad 
clusters in file xxxx". But, the problem recurred the next day.

Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was 
truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to 
read the data it would either get good or bad data.

However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on 
an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a 
set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old).

So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from 
entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the 
chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. 
Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less 
than 4 MB large.

Now I'm wondering if this is some "software" issue.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
David Barker
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew

When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and 
the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in your 
\Declude directory. This should contain the version and diagnostics. 
The valid options on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are:

Decludeproc -v   displays the version and build

Decludeproc -i   installs the decludeproc service

Decludeproc -u   uninstalls the decludeproc service

David B
www.declude.com


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
Andy Schmidt
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew


Dave -
 
That's what I call catch 22:
 
D:\IMail>decludeproc -diag
Invalid command line parameter:
-install     Install Declude
-diag        Print diagnostics

Hm - so let's see, after "-install", I used "-diag" to figure out 
what's wrong. But, "-diag" is invalid. The ony valid parameters are... 
"-install" and "-diag"?


Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 

 

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
Andy Schmidt
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew


Hi Dave,
 
thanks.
 
Next question:
 
I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2:
 
AUTOFORGE ON
 
BANEZIPEXTS ON
 
 
If I recall correctly, the idea was that:
BANZIPEXTS OFF
# BANEXT  EZIP
BANEZIPEXTS ON
 
would PERMIT banned extensions inside zipped files (where they could 
be scanned), but DENY banned extensions if they were contained inside 
encrypted zipped files.
 
Where those options forgotten in your config file - or are they no 
longer available in Version 3?


Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 

 

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
David Barker
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 02:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew


The Program Files\Declude is a temp directory that can be deleted 
after the install. The original purpose of this directory was to make 
available the latest configs as we do not overwrite your configs. This 
has since been removed in version 4.x where you will find a 
\Declude\Resources directory which has the same purpose.

David B
www.declude.com

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
Andy Schmidt
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew


Hi,
 
I'm trying to set up a server from scratch and thus downloaded and 
ran:
 
Declude_IM_N310.exe
 
and chose the option to let it do its install (rather than the option 
for "experienced" admins). PS - that screen has a typo!
 
The setup created a
 
    C:\Program Files\Declude
 
folder that contains just the 5 config files it also created the SAME 
files
in:
 
    D:\Imail\Declude
 
together with binaries and the various other Declude files.
 
I'm at loss!
 
Which location is the "right" one for the config files (I'm assuming 
the D:\Imail\Declude)?
 
What's the point of creating a "dummy" Folder in the C:\Program Files\ 
that contains no programs and that contains files that are not being 
used at all (assuming that being the case)?
 
Should I be deleting this Program Files folder to avoid confusion when 
someone else maintains this server?
 
Come on, the cold war has been over since Reagan - are we still trying 
to confuse the Russians?


Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 

 

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 03:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x


Andrew,

Thanks for your notes and their history.

I'm using the following settings right now:


	THREADS        30
	WAITFORMAIL    500
	WAITFORTHREADS        200
	WAITBETWEENTHREADS    100
	WINSOCKCLEANUP        OFF
	INVITEFIX    ON
	AUTOREVIEW        ON
	

There are a few reasons for trying these values.


	THREADS 30 - I'm pretty confident that dual 3.2 Ghz Xeons and RAID 
can only handle 30 threads with average messages.  In reality, one 
single message can spike the system to 100%, but these are uncommon.  
I figure that if I open this up too wide and I am dealing with a 
backup or something, launching more threads when at 100% CPU 
utilization will actually slow the system down.  This was the same 
with 2.x and before.  There is added overhead to managing threads and 
you don't want that to happen on top of 100% CPU utilization.  I am 
going to back up my server later tonight to see if I can't find what 
the magic number is since I don't want to be below that magic number, 
and it would probably be best to be a little above it.
	
	WAITFORMAIL 500 - On my server, this never kicks in, but if it did, 
it wouldn't make sense to delay for too long because I could build up 
messages.  A half second seems good.
	
	WAITFORTHREADS 200 - This apparently kicks in only when I reach my 
thread limit; sort of like a throttle.  I don't want it to be too long 
because this should only happen when I am hammered, but it is wise not 
to keep hammering when you are at 100%.  Sort of a mixed bag choice 
here.
	
	WAITBETWEENTHREADS 100 - I see this setting as being the biggest 
issue with sizing a server.  Setting it at 100 ms means that I can 
only handle 10 messages per second, and this establishes an upper limit
    
for what
  
the server can do.   I currently average about 5 messages per second
    
coming
  
from my gateways at peak hours, so I figured that to be safe, I should 
double that value.
	
	INVITEFIX ON - I have it on because it comes on by default and I 
don't know any better.  I know nothing about the cause for needing 
this outside of brief comments.  It seems strange that my Declude 
setup could ruin an invitation unless I was using footers.  If this is 
only triggered by footer use, I would like to know so that I could 
turn it off.  I would imagine that this causes extra load to do the 
check.
	
	AUTOREVIEW ON - I have this on for the same reason that Andrew 
pointed out.  When I restart Decludeproc, messages land in my review 
folder, and I don't wish to keep manually fishing things out.  If 
there is an issue with looping, it would be wise for Declude to make 
this only trigger say every 15 minutes instead of more regularly.
	

Feel free to add to this if you want.

Matt











Colbeck, Andrew wrote:

	I'd second that... on both the observed behaviour and the request
    
for 
  
documentation.
	 
	I'm attaching my highly commented declude.cfg as a reasonable
    
sample.
  
	 
	Andrew 8)
	 
	 


________________________________

		From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
		Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 10:36 AM
		To: [email protected]
		Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
		
		
		David,
		
		That did the trick.  I can't even see any messages in my
    
proc folder 
  
any more.  I might suggest adding your explanation to the comments in 
the file just in case others feel the need to turn this on like I did.  
I recalled the issues from the list and I turned it on because I 
didn't want the possibility of DNS crapping out and the leakage that 
this would cause.
		
		Here's a screen cap of what my processor graph looks like
now:
		
		
		
		

		Thanks,
		
		Matt
		
		
		
		David Barker wrote:

			The purpose of WINSOCKCLEANUP        ON is to reset
the winsock, what
			happens when using this setting is that when the
\proc directory hit 0
			decludeproc will finish processing all the messages
in the \work before
			checking the \proc again. As WINSOCKCLEANUP is to be
used only by those who
			experience DNS issues I would suggest running your
tests again with
			WINSOCKCLEANUP commented out and see how the
behavior differs. Also having
			the WAITFORMAIL to low can cause the CPU to process
very high as it is
			constantly checking the \proc I would suggest a
minimum of 500-1000
			
			David B
			www.declude.com
			
			-----Original Message-----
			From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
			[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Matt
			Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 8:12 PM
			To: [email protected]
			Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
			
			Darrell,
			
			I put up two Windows Explorer windows side-by-side
under normal volume 
			and the pattern was consistent where the proc folder
grows while the 
			work folder shrinks until the work folder hits zero
at which point the 
			proc folder empties out and everything lands in work
and then the 
			pattern repeats with proc growing while work
shrinks.
			
			My settings are as follows:
			
			THREADS        50
			WAITFORMAIL    100
			WAITFORTHREADS        10
			WAITBETWEENTHREADS    50
			WINSOCKCLEANUP        ON
			AUTOREVIEW        ON
			INVITEFIX    ON
			
			Matt
			
			
			
			
			Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
			
			  

					It's a faulty design that leaves
more than half a server's CPU 
					capacity unused due to the mere fact
that they wait for all threads 
					to complete before moving in a new
batch.
					      

				I can't speak to what you see on your
server, but that is not how it 
				is running on my server.  I just double
checked again to make sure I 
				am not crazy, but as I watch the thread
count on my server 
				(decludeproc) the threads fluctuate between
7 - 30 ( threads currently 
				set to 50).  It is not uncommon to see the
threads move as follow: 
				11,8,10,7,15,....  While I was watching it I
never seen a case where 
				it went down low enough for the WAITFORMAIL
setting to kick in.  
				Watching the proc/work directory you can see
files moving in and out, 
				but never really emptying out.  Its possible
what I am seeing is an 
				anomaly or maybe I am interpreting it wrong.
				
				Maybe David can comment on this.
				
				Darrell
	
------------------------------------------------------------------------
				invURIBL - Intelligent URI filtering plug-in
for Declude, mxGuard, and 
				ORF. Stop spam at the source the
spamvertised domain.  More effective 
				than traditional RBL's.  Try it today - 
http://www.invariantsystems.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.
				
				
				    

			---
			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.
			
			---
			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.
			
			
			  


---
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.

---
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.

---
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.

---
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.




---
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.




---
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.



  
    



---
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.




---
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.



  

---
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.

Reply via email to