RE: Memory Leak? - SpamAssassin

This is a discussion on RE: Memory Leak? - SpamAssassin ; Ron Smith wrote: > > Now, for those who want to engage is serious, and adult discussion > about what I think is a possible memory issue... I am still concerned > that there is a memory issue with SA. ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: RE: Memory Leak?

  1. RE: Memory Leak?

    Ron Smith wrote:
    >
    > Now, for those who want to engage is serious, and adult discussion
    > about what I think is a possible memory issue... I am still concerned
    > that there is a memory issue with SA. Because I've been aware that
    > under heavy loads, I've seen SA start to backup and the file count in
    > the queue rise into the thousands over 5 to 8 hours.
    >
    > When I reinstituted the blocklists in CommuniGate Pro, the spam load
    > falls dramatically and SA continues to function. And yet I'm still
    > getting tmp files in the Submitted folder that have multiple .tmp
    > extensions as though spamd was being respawned by the scanspam.sh
    > script after a child process dies inadvertently. I started having
    > these issues as I said when I upgraded from 3.1.8 to 3.2.5. I also had
    > installed the OS X 10.5.4 update. I turned Clamav off which was being
    > called by cgpav with no change. I've run CG Pro even without SA and
    > there is no problem, even without the blocklists. CGPro easily can
    > handle the 100,000 plus spam our server gets in a day.
    >
    > I've been wondering if this could be simply an inherent interpretive
    > slow-down in Perl. I had not compiled with sa-compile, but plan to do
    > that today or tomorrow as soon as I get re2c installed to see if there
    > is a performance improvement. I'll be interested to see how this
    > affects the multiple .tmp extensions. I'd be very interested to hear
    > from anyone else who've had issues like these that seemed to be
    > improved with compilation.


    I don't know much about how SA handles memory internally, but I do know
    that it tends to be a memory hog. This is at least partly due to
    optimizing for speed rather than memory use.

    The only time I've seen anything like what you are describing is when I
    had too many child processes running and the machine went into swap.
    Limit the child processes so that the machine doesn't start swapping
    under heavy load. Any usage of swap by SA will seriously slow down your
    spam processing.

    I don't know about the .tmp files. That would be a CommuniGate issue.

    --
    Bowie


  2. Re: Memory Leak?

    Thanks so much for your kind response, Bowie. That has become my
    conclusion also. Do you use sa-compile and if so, have you seen that
    improve memory usage?

    I've tried adjusting the child processes up and down with little
    effect I think. Are you using 2 or 3? What's your timeout setting for
    spamd?

    Ron Smith
    postmaster@pmbx.net

    "Having an email problem is painful, but character-building."

    On Jul 25, 2008, at 9:17 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote:

    > I don't know much about how SA handles memory internally, but I do
    > know
    > that it tends to be a memory hog. This is at least partly due to
    > optimizing for speed rather than memory use.
    >
    > The only time I've seen anything like what you are describing is
    > when I
    > had too many child processes running and the machine went into swap.
    > Limit the child processes so that the machine doesn't start swapping
    > under heavy load. Any usage of swap by SA will seriously slow down
    > your
    > spam processing.
    >
    > I don't know about the .tmp files. That would be a CommuniGate issue.



+ Reply to Thread