Massive queue buildup

Chandler, Jay chandler at
Wed Nov 15 05:42:57 GMT 2006

ov 14 20:07:42 brewer MailScanner[37903]: Batch (30 messages) processed
in 328.23 seconds
Nov 14 20:07:51 brewer MailScanner[38335]: Batch (30 messages) processed
in 670.92 seconds
Nov 14 20:08:37 brewer MailScanner[38125]: Batch (30 messages) processed
in 643.34 seconds

That's not good.

Disabled DCC, Razor, and Pyzor, and I'm still seeing batch times in the
same general range.  I've got RAM to burn, so I kicked up the number of
children to 30, and I'm still seeing the same batch times, but the queue
is decrementing.  Finally, I built up a box that's blazingly fast in
processors, and woefully short of RAM, and put that ahead of this one in
the mailserver precedence list.  We'll see how it handles tomorrow.

Thanks for the assist, folks-- I appreciate it.

Jay Chandler
Network Administrator, Chapman University
714.628.7249 / chandler at
Today's Excuse: It must have been the lightning storm we had (yesterday)
(last week) (last month) 

-----Original Message-----
From: mailscanner-bounces at
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces at] On Behalf Of Res
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 2:15 PM
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: RE: Massive queue buildup

Hi Jay,

On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Chandler, Jay wrote:

> 3. I am running DCC, as well as Razor.

What did log speed = yes show?
Did disabling dcc improve things?

Razor was not a problem here nor all the SA rules from the fsl guys, i
disabled all one, one by one put them back in, did not take long to see
dcc was the culprit, since  ive disabled it, it's all good.


"Just a world that we all must share, it's not enough just to stand and
stare, is it only a dream that there'll be no more turning away" - Floyd

MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at

Before posting, read

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

More information about the MailScanner mailing list