From: "Larry Nedry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, 2008, July 27 12:02
On 7/27/08 at 8:28 AM -0700 jdow wrote:
These are important results. They show that you have a plenty fast
enough machine for 100,000 emails per day, although given the fact
that daytime is pretty bad compared to night time you'd probably see
significant slowdowns in throughput during the day as the machine
overloads. You'd be in deadly trouble with 200,000 messages filtered.
Ron Smith's machine could easily handle 200,000 messages filtered per day.
I know, I've got one just like it.
The first result is pure throughput for spamd. Figure most of that
.354 seconds is CPU time for spamd. That gives you an upper limit on
what the machine is likely to be able to handle, 86400/.354 messages
per day. Of course you have other things running as well. So the
nearly 250,000 message capacity isn't really there. Figure it's maybe
100,000 max if the MTA and other utilities are running.
Of course that is if the machine is only running ONE spamd process. He is
running 4 at the moment.
Earlier results you produced showed that spamd is using a fairly
nominal amount of memory for your installation, 50 megs a pop.
Actually it is closer to 25M a pop. Check his top results in his email of
7/25/08 at 9:02 PM -0400.
PID proc user CPU Thrds Real Mem Vir Mem
73445 perl nobody 0.0 1 25.79 MB 618.09 MB
156 perl root 0.0 1 24.55 MB 608.68 MB
71709 perl nobody 0.0 1 26.82 MB 618.35 MB
Um, OK - with column lineups I'd missed the declaration of 618 megabytes
per "perl" session. Under Linux running a large collection of rules I do
not go over 70 megabytes virtual memory and 60 megs "resident" memory. So
the 620 megs sounds "absurd" to me. And surely if one perl session gobbles
that much memory from the system I'd expect 4 children plus the momma would
even be touchy on a 4 gigabyte machine. Where does all that memory go on
the Apple machines? Or is it mega-bits they read out?
{^_^}
