Am I right in thinking you are running apache, sendmail AND pop with a
machine with only 32 MB of RAM ? how many users do you expect this to serve
? one ;-)
I would be inclined to up the amount of physical RAM you have since I think
running in daemon mode requires more memory.
Also it's a newer version.... so more memory used again.
You're swapping quite a bit, but check your paging - you can use 'procinfo'
for this. Page out is usually bad I think.
I am sure this will be a contributory factor if not THE reason!
-----Original Message-----
From: Ricky Crow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 20 December 2000 15:53
To: Peter Evans
Cc: Subscribers of Qpopper
Subject: Re: Serious problem....
On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Peter Evans wrote:
> lots. But no actual information ^^;
>
>
> 1 - what OS are you running, have you locked down any of the
> non-essential crap that things like redhat/solaris
> and the likes come with?
Running BSD/OS 2.01... Yes, I know it's old, but it has been extremely
stable over the last 4-5 years on the same machine.
Yes, the system has been locked down, as well.
> 2 - when it craps out (for want of a better word) what else is the
> system doing? Commands that may help you here:
>
> top
Nothing really serious or unusual, here... I am experiencing the problem
as of right now, and here's what top shows:
load averages: 0.46, 0.41, 0.36
09:43:37
90 processes: 2 running, 88 sleeping
Cpu states: 2.0% user, 0.0% nice, 3.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 95.0%
idle
Memory: Real: 15M/32M Virt: 78M/254M Free: 72M
PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
12362 root 2 0 5184K 5084K sleep 1:37 1.61% 1.61% named
23724 root 2 0 1148K 1040K sleep 0:00 6.00% 0.29% sendmail
23721 root 28 0 256K 444K run 0:00 1.40% 0.20% top
23325 nobody 2 0 1900K 972K sleep 0:00 0.10% 0.10% httpd
23656 nobody 2 0 1900K 944K sleep 0:00 0.05% 0.05% httpd
19761 root 2 0 1044K 260K sleep 0:05 0.05% 0.05% sendmail
23131 root 28 0 536K 388K run 0:00 0.00% 0.00% ftpd
1991 root 18 0 1876K 1000K sleep 0:24 0.00% 0.00% httpd
15981 rickyc 18 0 592K 764K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
17909 root 18 0 584K 744K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
19574 root 18 0 540K 704K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
15159 rickyc 18 0 536K 660K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
13145 rickyc 18 0 536K 652K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
126 root 18 -12 352K 416K sleep 0:00 0.00% 0.00% xntpd
2099 root 18 0 340K 220K sleep 0:02 0.00% 0.00% cron
> iostat
ns1: {44} % iostat
tty sd0 sd1 sd2 sd3
cpu
tin tout sps tps msps sps tps msps sps tps msps sps tps msps us ni sy
id
0 38 87 3 4.9 0 0 5.0 0 0 0.0 351 24 3.8 8 0 21
0 71
I don't know EXACTLY what all of that means on iostat, but that's what it
shows right now, too.
> netstat
There is nothing unusual in there....and no connections on port 110 right
now, either.
> ps -ef (-auxww or whatever)
Nothing unusual.. There are probably too many processes listed to copy
and paste into this email, but there isn't anything that makes me
suspicious or looks unusual.
> lsof
I don't have that command on this machine for some reason......
> These should give you hints about things like resource-starvation,
> strange crap and so on.
Nothing strange... Can't figure this out... Any other ideas?
> 3 - look in the system logs for clues.
>
> This is probably number 2a, not 3.
Been looking in the logs....even doing a tail -f to watch the log as it's
happening, then I keep testing mail in another window and waiting for it
to "crap out" and nothing.... Nothing unusual. No inetd messages telling
me that it is shutting down that service or anything.... It's frustrating
me to no end.
> There, that should get you looking in the right direction.
> It could be something as simple as "not using server-mode/
> noupdateonabort/nostatus and having allowed your lusers to
> build up 900 mb mailboxes."
We have a few people with mailboxes approaching 10 megs on the system, but
by and large, we don't have all that many that get that big.
> Oh, and we have 30000 lusers on a linux box using qp3.1+ldap,
> without so much as a hiccup. so I suspect soemthing silly.
Damn.... I wish I could say that.....
I've only got a couple of thousand on this box, and it's giving me fits.
Ricky
