Box 1 Pentium II 350 Mhz 256 Mb Ram, HD IDE RedHat 7.3 - Perl 5.6 - kernel 2.4.20 Spamassasin 2.55, Sophie 3.03, sweep 3.73, qmail-scanner-1.16
Average over 387 messages (1 hour) p_s: 0,017859015 secs sophie: 0,101077591 secs S_A: 0,693710315 secs Total: 1,163049947 secs
Box 2 Pentium III 1000 Mhz 512 Mb Ram, HD SCSI RedHat 7.3 - Perl 5.6 - kernel 2.4.22 Spamassasin 2.55, Sophie 3.03, sweep 3.73, qmail-scanner-1.16
Average over 33 messages (1 hour) sophie: 0,075714515 secs S_A: 1,308789364 secs p_s: 0,006935515 secs init_scan: 1,392487788 secs Total: 3,880213758 secs
I was wrong in my last messages, there is nothig after the scanners that delays the process in 1.2rc3, there is somethig before the scanners...
I have add some debug lines like this on both installations:
##### debug time
$elapsed_1=tv_interval ($start_time, [gettimeofday]);
&mdebug("after_w_c: elapsed time from start $elapsed_1 secs");This traces the time from the start of the process, and I found that the routine "working_copy" in 1.2rc3 needs much more time than 1.16
I sent a plain text message with a word document attached to both boxes.
Box 1 - qs1.16
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: +++ starting debugging for process 32013 by uid=81 at 14/09/2003 12:36:01
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: before_w_c: elapsed time from start 0.001727 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: after_w_c: elapsed time from start 0.243278 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: after_d_m: elapsed time from start 0.280731 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: from=xxx, subj=SCONTI FINO AL 30%!
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: p_s: finished in 0.017778 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: sophie: finished in 0.101606 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: SA: finished scan in 0.526621 secs - hits=1.1
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: ini_sc: scanning message took 0.647414 seconds
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: ini_sc: elapsed time from start 0.929365 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: q_r: elapsed time from start 1.037196 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:01:32013: cleanup: elapsed time from start 1.043298 secs
14/09/2003 12:36:02:32013: ------ all finished. Total of 1.045224 secs
Box 2 - qs 1.2rc3
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: +++ starting debugging for process 10451 by uid=81 at 14/09/2003 12:35:56
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: before_w_c: elapsed time from start 0.000957 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: after_w_c: elapsed time from start 2.395012 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: after_d_m: elapsed time from start 2.417281 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: from=xxx, subj=SCONTI FINO AL 30%!
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: sophie: finished in 0.044068 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: S_A: finished in 0.24179 secs - hits=1.1
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: p_s: finished in 0.005227 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: ini_sc: scanning message took 0.292246 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: ini_sc: elapsed time from start 2.710274 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: q_r: elapsed time from start 2.801417 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: cleanup: elapsed time from start 2.806308 secs
14/09/2003 12:35:56:10451: ------ all finished. Total of 2.806717 secs
Elapsed time for working_copy in box 1: 0.243278-0.001727=0,241551
Elapsed time for working_copy in box 2: 2.395012-0.000957=2,394055
I've sent the same message several times, always with similar results. I also tested it with a big html messages with some images, here ils the results:
Elapsed time for working_copy in box 1: 2.007257-0.001436=2,005821
Elapsed time for working_copy in box 2: 8.201475-0.00097=8,200505
I don't know is this is really a problem, maybe with a low traffic no.
Salvatore
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Qmail-scanner-general mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
