Tzafrir
Thanks.
btw - - the machine is a single (not dual) Xeon 3.2 with 1 gig Ram -
gotta be careful with these hyper-threading processors :-)
Between 2:00 and 2:10 this morning all 4 children were active - taking
25% of CPU and about 200MB working set of memory each
sar -B shows that
:
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005, Danny Lieberman wrote about Spamd is taking 3-5' to finish a
single scan:
spamd will take anywhere from 3s to 90s and more to scan a single mail
Is this CPU time, or just wall-clock time?
If it's just wall-clock time, i.e., it takes 3-90 seconds to process a single
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005, Danny Lieberman wrote:
I like your thinking - i also suspected network round trips/timeouts/DNS
lookups as a reason to see multiples of 10-30s. I found that the
process was timing out on pyzor
and we are now doing all the black list checking in the qmail tcp
processor -
:
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005, Danny Lieberman wrote about Spamd is taking 3-5' to finish a
single scan:
spamd will take anywhere from 3s to 90s and more to scan a single mail
Is this CPU time, or just wall-clock time?
If it's just wall-clock time, i.e., it takes 3-90 seconds to process
Danny Lieberman wrote:
how do we get spamd to run faster?
1. Check the spamassassin site for ways to optimize your installation.
2. Reduce blacklist lookups to 2 or 3 (spamhaus + dsnsbl at a minimum).
Check also for razor/DCC misconfigurations.
3. Use a caching nameserver.
4 Check
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 12:15:44PM +0200, Danny Lieberman wrote:
Amos
Yes - the cpu IS stressed because each spamd app hogs the cpu for so
long- :-(
But if the disk is busy over-swapping, how can the CPU be the
bottleneck? 100% CPU?
I went back to the height of the feeding frenzy at
