memory footprint

Michael Weiser mweiser at FACHSCHAFT.IMN.HTWK-LEIPZIG.DE
Sat Feb 15 16:56:00 GMT 2003

On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Julian Field wrote:

> >Are these assumptions correct? What do others see with different versions
> >of perl?
> >Would it make sense to compile mailscanner its own perl-5.0004 or so?
> MailScanner will only work with Perl 5.005 or above.
Will perl-5.005 make it noticeably smaller?

> >Is there any way to slim mailscanner down, especially the parent process?
> As it is virtually all swapped out, what's the point?
It's there, needlessly consuming system resources.

As I understand it the mailscanner perl program first "uses" all the
Modules it will ever need and then forks. I thought about a scenario where
the parent process first forks and then the children load all the modules
they require for their work. Wouldn't that make the parent a lot more

> >Where would I want to start looking if I had some perl experience and were
> >willing to do some hacking on my own?
> The source :-)
I see. ;)
bye, Micha

More information about the MailScanner mailing list