What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |

--- Comment #3 from ---
The subject should have read spamd not spamc.

(In reply to RW from comment #1)
> (In reply to marc from comment #0)
> > If I disable those plugins, there's still a (slower) memory leak.
> Did you fully disable the plugins by commenting-out the loadplugin line? 

Yes.  Plugins were disabled by commenting out the respective loadplugin lines.

> > My 'fix' is to restart spamd with a cron job.  But that's just a band-aid
> > solution.
> By default spamc processes self-destruct after 200 scans. A better
> workaround would be to set --max-conn-per-child to something lower - I'd
> start with 10. It doesn't make all that much difference what you set it to
> as most initialization is done in the parent process. If necessary it could
> be set to 1, which would (hopefully) eliminate the problem.

I am not sure that on my implementation the spamd children self-destruct after
200 messages.  But after reading your comment, I set --max-conn-per-child to 50
messages.  This gets the spamd children to about 500MB before they get killed.

While this is good to keep the server running without interruption, it is still
a band-aid solution.  Ideally, the source(s) of the memory leaks should be
found and fixed.


You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to