Slow MailScanner

[Eduardo Casarero]

how is your expire bayes conf?

2007/2/13, DAve <dave.list at pixelhammer.com>:
>
> Jay Chandler wrote:
> > I have two servers.
> >
> > Here's one:
> >
> > aconcagua#  tail -f /var/log/maillog |grep rocessed
> > Feb 13 08:39:58 aconcagua MailScanner[83401]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.66 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:39:58 aconcagua MailScanner[83008]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 10.06 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:00 aconcagua MailScanner[83989]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.11 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:03 aconcagua MailScanner[83677]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.84 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:04 aconcagua MailScanner[82475]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.70 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:05 aconcagua MailScanner[82359]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 8.74 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:06 aconcagua MailScanner[83301]: Batch (2 messages)
> > processed in 12.81 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:07 aconcagua MailScanner[82879]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 7.75 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:09 aconcagua MailScanner[82035]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.53 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:11 aconcagua MailScanner[83989]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.41 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:11 aconcagua MailScanner[84046]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.84 seconds
> > Feb 13 08:40:12 aconcagua MailScanner[83301]: Batch (1 message)
> > processed in 6.56 seconds
> >
> > Here's the other:
> >
> >> spacecowboy# tail -f /var/log/maillog |grep rocessed
> >> Feb 13 08:38:57 spacecowboy MailScanner[54541]: Batch (9 messages)
> >> processed in 252.21 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:12 spacecowboy MailScanner[49475]: Batch (2 messages)
> >> processed in 61.60 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:12 spacecowboy MailScanner[53408]: Batch (4 messages)
> >> processed in 86.83 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:14 spacecowboy MailScanner[53430]: Batch (2 messages)
> >> processed in 31.38 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:17 spacecowboy MailScanner[54987]: Batch (8 messages)
> >> processed in 166.69 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:18 spacecowboy MailScanner[53490]: Batch (19 messages)
> >> processed in 531.03 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:21 spacecowboy MailScanner[53398]: Batch (14 messages)
> >> processed in 384.67 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:30 spacecowboy MailScanner[53412]: Batch (8 messages)
> >> processed in 97.58 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:32 spacecowboy MailScanner[54123]: Batch (2 messages)
> >> processed in 62.52 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:38 spacecowboy MailScanner[53430]: Batch (1 message)
> >> processed in 24.16 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:39 spacecowboy MailScanner[55686]: Batch (30 messages)
> >> processed in 647.57 seconds
> >> Feb 13 08:39:48 spacecowboy MailScanner[56780]: Batch (5 messages)
> >> processed in 68.93 seconds
> >
> > Any idea what would be causing this?  Same configuration, same MX
> > priority.  The one with delays has built quite the queue backlog.
> >
>
> Can both machines resolve DNS with the same speed?
> Do you have a caching name server on both machines?
> Is the Bays DB the same size on both machines?
>
> DAve
>
>
> --
> Three years now I've asked Google why they don't have a
> logo change for Memorial Day. Why do they choose to do logos
> for other non-international holidays, but nothing for
> Veterans?
>
> Maybe they forgot who made that choice possible.
> --
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
>
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
>
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20070213/30373174/attachment.html