Pavel Sanda wrote:
There was a suspicion at some time that trac could begin to eat cpu
cycles without reason. An upgrade could help.
it may be that trac go insane from time to time. but what i have seen last
weeks via top lead me to the conviction that swapping is the problem.
That's what it looks like to me, too. If you look at the swap usage,
it's quite high:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 249 240 9 0 5 29
-/+ buffers/cache: 205 43
Swap: 1021 269 751
So we're actually using more swap space than there is memory in the
computer as a whole. That has to lead to a lot of swapping, which is of
course expensive.
looking at the RES memory usage, the main consumers are these. what if we
start by running less childerns of spamd?
59m 2:32.53 spamd
57m 0:52.08 spamd
37m 1:48.72 spamd
Wow.
Richard
