From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 18:43:40 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6655106567C for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 18:43:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: from smtp1.tls.net (smtp1.tls.net [65.196.224.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640438FC15 for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 18:43:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: (qmail 24636 invoked from network); 9 May 2008 18:43:36 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.3 ppid: 24622, pid: 24632, t: 0.1397s scanners: attach: 1.2.3 clamav: 0.91.1/m:45/d:6125 spam: 3.2.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on smtp1.tls.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=20.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.2.1 Received: from 64-184-10-3.bb.hrtc.net (HELO ?192.168.1.46?) (ldg%tls.net@64.184.10.3) by auth-smtp1.tls.net with ESMTPA; 9 May 2008 18:43:36 -0000 Message-ID: <48249AD5.1080901@pixelhammer.com> Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 14:41:25 -0400 From: DAve User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 'User Questions' References: <482473B7.7070707@pixelhammer.com> <20080509202416.C53368@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20080509202416.C53368@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: FBSD 6.2 Xeon 2.4ghz CPU and high load X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 18:43:40 -0000 Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> software was upgraded as well which consists of MailScanner and >> Sendmail. Both had been keep up to date so it was not a jump in >> required resources. >> >> The issue I am seeing is that my server load, under the same traffic >> load, has increased 4 times or more. Where previously we saw a high >> load on the servers of 5 to 8, we are now seeing 14 to 17. Since the >> upgrade Sendmail has begun to timeout connections. > > do you feel that system goes slower? > i think it's just the matter of calculation method - 6.* may calculate > it different way. > > just change in your sendmail config the values in place of xx > > define(`confQUEUE_LA', `xx') > define(`confREFUSE_LA', `xx') > > > as just accepting mail isn't a problem i set confREFUSE_LA very high It is already set to higher than the load we see. I don't "see" sendmail refusing connections. What happens is I try to test sendmail from another server and the connection never completes. I'm knockin', sendmail ain't answering. DAve -- In 50 years, our descendants will look back on the early years of the internet, and much like we now look back on men with rockets on their back and feathers glued to their arms, marvel that we had the intelligence to wipe the drool from our chins.