- Original Message -
From: Nigel Horne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] kernel: Out of Memory:Killed process x
(clamd).
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Hi Fajar,
Thanks for you
* Fajar A. Nugraha [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Which brings my earlier suggestion. Is there any way to put a
built-in memory limiter (not external program like softlimit) to
clamd?
Why add code to clamd when a good unix-like solution already exists?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt (i.A. des IT-Zentrum)
Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
D Walsh wrote:
I sat down in front of a Solaris 9 system, installed clamav as
instructed and yes indeed there appears to be a problem with the
implementation of free(), in 30 mins of sending e-mail from the EICAR
test site memory did climb to 2.87gb and did not clear
On Sep 15, 2004, at 01:48, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
D Walsh wrote:
I sat down in front of a Solaris 9 system, installed clamav as
instructed and yes indeed there appears to be a problem with the
implementation of free(), in 30 mins of sending e-mail from the EICAR
test site memory did climb
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Fajar A. Nugraha [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Which brings my earlier suggestion. Is there any way to put a
built-in memory limiter (not external program like softlimit) to
clamd?
Why add code to clamd when a good unix-like solution already exists?
Because softlimit is a
* Fajar A. Nugraha [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Because softlimit is a hack.
It is not a hack. It is common pratice to run programs using least
privilege and with limited resource to prevent runaway conditions.
Because current clamd implementation is not to die on
memory allocation error, but sleep.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:58:41AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Because current clamd implementation is not to die on
memory allocation error, but sleep.
It doesn't die, it's being killed by the kernel.
No - clamd does a malloc and that fails. Then instead of dying (which would
be the
* Jason Haar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:58:41AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Because current clamd implementation is not to die on
memory allocation error, but sleep.
It doesn't die, it's being killed by the kernel.
No - clamd does a malloc and that fails. Then
On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 12:27, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Jason Haar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 09:58:41AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Because current clamd implementation is not to die on
memory allocation error, but sleep.
It doesn't die, it's being killed by
* Trog [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, THAT's bad - and should be fixed.
If it were true it would be. Please point me at some code in clamd that
does that.
That was not my claim, but the other person's.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt (i.A. des IT-Zentrum) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charite -
On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 15:17, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Trog [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ok, THAT's bad - and should be fixed.
If it were true it would be. Please point me at some code in clamd that
does that.
That was not my claim, but the other person's.
I know, I believe I correctly
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Fact: We've been running clamd for a week now, scanning 130.000 mails
per week.
With that amount you shouldn't have any problem.
Try 1157851 mail per day (that's yesterday's count on one of my MTAs).
Question: Why do I see 4 clamd processes?
Might be threads
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Clamd works great for lots of people, but some have reported memory
leaks on latest stable (0.75.1),
which could cause your system to be out of memory.
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported memory
leaks in stable
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:38:57AM +0100, Trog wrote:
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported memory
leaks in stable versions of clamd.
However, none of those people have submitted a report from a memory
debugging tool to show where the leak occurs on their systems,
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 04:36, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
If you have another primary scanner (clamd is your backup), then you
should stick to it for now.
Clamd works great for lots of people, but some have reported memory
leaks on latest stable (0.75.1),
which could cause your system to be
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Hi Fajar,
Thanks for you answer. It's the most usefull i got 'till today.
I will take a look at the tools you suguested...
The leak is from clamd...i checked 'top' and saw how it swallows all
avialble memory until it is killed by kernel.
Trog wrote:
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Clamd works great for lots of people, but some have reported memory
leaks on latest stable (0.75.1),
which could cause your system to be out of memory.
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported memory
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 09:42, Jason Haar wrote:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:38:57AM +0100, Trog wrote:
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported memory
leaks in stable versions of clamd.
However, none of those people have submitted a report from a memory
debugging
On Sep 14, 2004, at 03:38, Trog wrote:
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Clamd works great for lots of people, but some have reported memory
leaks on latest stable (0.75.1),
which could cause your system to be out of memory.
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have
Jason Haar wrote:
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 08:38:57AM +0100, Trog wrote:
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported memory
leaks in stable versions of clamd.
However, none of those people have submitted a report from a memory
debugging tool to show where the leak occurs on
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Hi Fajar,
Thanks for you answer. It's the most usefull i got 'till today.
I will take a look at the tools you suguested...
The leak is from clamd...i checked 'top' and saw how it swallows all
avialble memory until it is
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 11:04, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
That is not evidence of a memory leak. It is evidence of as lot of memory
being used at runtime which is a very different thing.
BTW, what IS the evidence of memory leak?
There is no substantiated evidence at this point.
Would
Trog wrote:
I know that the amount of memory used should be varied depending on
system activity,
but when clamd uses 1 or 2 GB memory when it does nothing (well, it WAS
very busy
earlier, but it's doing nothing now) is _weird_
If you're scanning multiple 1GB files concurrently, then your
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV) have reported
memory
leaks in stable versions of clamd.
However, none of those people have submitted a report from a memory
debugging tool to show where the leak occurs on their systems,
despite
being asked to by the development team. None of
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 12:07, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Trog wrote:
If you're scanning multiple 1GB files concurrently, then your going to
use 1-2GB of memory.
That's just it. I put a size limit on my mail system, BEFORE clamd has a
chance to scan it,
so I know for a fact that no mail
Thomas Lamy wrote:
From the different posts here I bet there are library issues in BSD, as
that OS is number one when it comes to leakage complains.
More specifically, it tends to be FreeBSD 5* systems which have the most
complaints. FreeBSD 4* systems have been rock solid with Clam upto
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 10:34, D Walsh wrote:
Would you consider the following a sign of a memory leak?
IDname user cpu threads real mem virtual mem
1899 freshclam clamav 0.00 1
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 10:30, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
and since
valgrind only works
on Linux
For the record, this is wrong. 1) Valgrind works on FreeBSD.
2) It's only x86, so it doesn't work on all Linux's.
I can't use it on Solaris/sparc,
This is true.
Fajar
-Nigel
--
Nigel Horne.
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 11:04, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Hi Fajar,
Thanks for you answer. It's the most usefull i got 'till today.
I will take a look at the tools you suguested...
The leak is from clamd...i checked
On Tue, 14 Sep 2004, Trog wrote:
On Tue, 2004-09-14 at 06:30, Meni Shapiro wrote:
Clamd works great for lots of people, but some have reported memory
leaks on latest stable (0.75.1),
which could cause your system to be out of memory.
A few people (out of the thousands who run ClamAV)
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 11:07, Thomas Lamy wrote:
For quite a while (6 weeks) I collected each and every mail on one of my
MXes. I checked them offline for leaks using a shell wrapper, which
checked clams memory usage between each feeded mail, but found really
nothing.
I'll start that
Would you call memory usage of 128MB leak?
Would you call clamd memory usage of 3GB leak?
Neither. I would call losing reference to allocated memory a memory
leak.
Ok, but just two things:
The clam conf is set to limit the amount of memory that should be
scanned. If there is no memory
Nigel Horne wrote:
Though I probably should rephrase my statements from now, and no longer
use the phrase memory leak but high memory usage instead.
That is different.
High memory usage != memory leak
Actually, that is my point. Right now I'm not sure whether there IS any
memory leak at
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 10:34, D Walsh wrote:
Would you consider the following a sign of a memory leak?
IDname user cpu threads real mem virtual mem
1899 freshclam
On Sep 14, 2004, at 23:38, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Tuesday 14 Sep 2004 10:34, D Walsh wrote:
Would you consider the following a sign of a memory leak?
IDname user cpu threads real mem virtual mem
-
For the record I just want to say that I think using excessive memory is
more correct than memory leak.
The reason I thought clamd had a memory leak was because I'd run it under
softlimits (set to say 40M) and clamd would end up (after mins,hours or
days) hung at 39xxxM. The logs would show it to
Nigel Horne wrote:
On Friday 10 Sep 2004 19:01, Meni Shapiro wrote:
hi guys,
I got clamd running on a rh9 machine with mimedefang sendmail 8.12.8 (yes
i know...should upgrade to 8.13.x )
[snip]
Sep 10 19:16:46 kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process x (clamd).
[snip]
How
Hi Fajar,
Thanks for you answer. It's the most usefull i got 'till today.
I will take a look at the tools you suguested...
The leak is from clamd...i checked 'top' and saw how it swallows all
avialble memory until it is killed by kernel.
It is indeed the primary AV filter, and i thought of
hi guys,
I got clamd running on a rh9 machine with mimedefang sendmail 8.12.8 (yes
i know...should upgrade to 8.13.x )
i got a problem that sometimes apears every 30 minutes!! and sometimes after
few days!!(up to 2 weeks!)
i get this line in /var/log/messages:
Sep 10 19:16:46 kernel: Out
On Friday 10 Sep 2004 19:01, Meni Shapiro wrote:
hi guys,
I got clamd running on a rh9 machine with mimedefang sendmail 8.12.8 (yes
i know...should upgrade to 8.13.x )
i got a problem that sometimes apears every 30 minutes!! and sometimes after
few days!!(up to 2 weeks!)
i get this line
40 matches
Mail list logo
