My system is being overwhelmed!

[Don Newcomer]

That 84M is the virtual address size.  The next column is the real resident
size and that varies from 5M to about 20M.  I too was surprised that the
amount of load this put on the system.  I could turn Bayes off but I think
that's a HUGE part of SA's effectiveness.  I've set it so that any messages
picked up in RBLS are designated spam and not scanner for spam to save
processor time.  I'd welcome other suggestions.  Right now during the day,
our run queues are hanging in the 14-18 range!

================================================================================
Don Newcomer                                            Dickinson College
Senior Manager, Systems                                 P.O. Box 1773
newcomer at dickinson.edu                                  Carlisle, PA  17013
                                                        Phone: (717) 245-1256
                                                          FAX: (717) 245-1690


On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, James Gray wrote:

> Yikes - is that 84M paged or resident?!  That seems like an awful lot of
> RAM for even MailScanner.  We run over 1300 custom spamassassin rules
> with the Bayseian engine, and see less than half of what you're showing
> above.
>
> Here's what my main gateway is reporting:
>    VSZ   RSS   LIM TSIZ %CPU %MEM COMMAND
> 41992 41524     -  760 29.0  3.2 /opt/MailScanner/bin/MailScanner
> 40944 40464     -  760  0.0  3.1 /opt/MailScanner/bin/MailScanner
> 40868 40372     -  760  0.0  3.1 /opt/MailScanner/bin/MailScanner
> 40476 39996     -  760  0.0  3.1 /opt/MailScanner/bin/MailScanner
> 13896 13548     -  760  0.0  1.0 /opt/MailScanner/bin/MailScanner
>
> As you can see, mine are all around the 40-41M mark (except for the
> parent process) and that's pretty normal for us.  MailScanner uses lots
> of RAM and the more you have, the better.  We only run three children
> which suits our mail flow patterns.
>
> SpamAssassin on the other hand is a CPU hog, especially if you are using
> the Bayseian engine.  Although with a pair of EV7's @1GHz I wouldn't
> think this would pose a significant problem.  Our server on has a single
> P3-1.2GHz and rarely goes over 0.5 system load.
>
> Not sure if any of this helps, but I haven't played with HP-UX/True64 in
> a long time...so I might be reading the columns all wrong in your original.
>
> Cheers,
>
> James
>