On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:34:34 -0400
Julien Vehent <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]
> 
>  It's better now, it seems. It's been running for a few days without 
>  devouring memory:
> 
>  $ ps -ylC dspam
>  S   UID   PID  PPID  C PRI  NI   RSS    SZ WCHAN  TTY          TIME CMD
>  S   999 18378     1  0  80   0 17264 45464 ?      ?        00:02:56 
>  dspam
> 
>  I did not change anything in dspam configuration, but I did tweak 
>  postgres a bit, essentialy adapting the shared_buffer. I don't know how 
>  that could have an influence on Dspam, or maybe it's just not related at 
>  all.
> 
It is! How high was your shared_buffer? You know that by default PostgreSQL is 
using (I think) 64 shared buffers each having 8Kb. Some operations lock the 
shared buffer and some don't. I guess that the maintenance task of DSPAM is 
heavy using the shared buffer and this results in such a high memory usage on 
your part. Remember that 'ps' is not always capable in detecting processes 
using shared memory and counts the shared memory as used memory.


>  I'm still curious about that valgrind command though, just in case it 
>  happens again.
> 
Just running the DSPAM server with valgrind would result in a insane amount of 
log data. Are you really willing do run it with valgrind?

> 
>  Thanks,
>  Julien
> 
-- 
Kind Regards from Switzerland,

Stevan Bajić

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content
authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image
Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Dspam-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user

Reply via email to