8 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-questionssudden peak in load average| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Zbigniew Szalbot | Feb 27, 2008 10:59 am | |
| Kris Kennaway | Feb 27, 2008 11:03 am | |
| Zbigniew Szalbot | Feb 27, 2008 11:31 am | |
| Mark Tinguely | Feb 27, 2008 1:46 pm | |
| Zbigniew Szalbot | Feb 27, 2008 3:39 pm | |
| Bart Silverstrim | Feb 27, 2008 3:58 pm | |
| Mark Tinguely | Feb 27, 2008 5:15 pm | |
| Bart Silverstrim | Feb 27, 2008 5:20 pm |
| Subject: | sudden peak in load average | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Bart Silverstrim (bsil...@chrononomicon.com) | |
| Date: | Feb 27, 2008 5:20:23 pm | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-questions | |
Mark Tinguely wrote:
Is it possible that there's a message in your queue that's *being processed*, so it may have arrived earlier than near that time and causes the spike?
Bart is correct that the SA processing occurs before sendmail log entry.
Lately, I have had problems with the latest spamass-milter. Occasionally, something is forking off another spamass-milter and the original one is in some tight loop eating processor time. I am not sure if it is the newer spamass-milter or the fact that I also added the dkim-milter into the mix.
FYI: I sent to the original questioner a crude C program to monitor his current loadaverage. This monitor will save the output of the command "ps -aux" to a timestamped temporary file when the current loadaverage exceeds a defined amount (15.0).
Another thing to look at would be the output of something like lsof, so that if it is spamassassin, maybe there's a possibility that it could be narrowed down to a particular temporary file unless there's another way to see if there's a particular message chewing away on SA's analysis?
It doesn't take a big message to skew SA asunder if it has the right bit of information in it...