From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 21:30:00 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 0C490106564A for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 21:30:00 +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 BC85F8FC14 for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 21:29:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: (qmail 44043 invoked from network); 9 May 2008 21:29:58 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.3 ppid: 44016, pid: 44024, t: 6.8044s 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 21:29:51 -0000 Message-ID: <4824C1CD.4040006@pixelhammer.com> Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 17:27:41 -0400 From: DAve User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: User Questions References: <482473B7.7070707@pixelhammer.com> <48248AC9.5060507@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20080509202941.J53368@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <9F98C32F-0DA0-40F9-B82B-4866F3D600CB@mac.com> <48249E0A.8080709@pixelhammer.com> In-Reply-To: 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 21:30:00 -0000 Chuck Swiger wrote: > On May 9, 2008, at 11:55 AM, DAve wrote: >>> For single-processor systems, FreeBSD 4.11 does very well at a lot of >>> tasks. However, Dave apparently has a 4-CPU system (~8 threads if he >>> enabled hyperthreading), and for real SMP hardware, more recent >>> versions of FreeBSD generally perform better than 4.x would. >> >> Single CPU quad core. > > OK. > >> ps -aux output is up, look under the FBSD dir. I also put up both >> dmesg.boot files from the servers. > > MailScanner is what is taking up all of the load; tuning that area is > where you need to focus. > > Things which come to mind are trying to limit the max number of children > of that being run to something smaller, perhaps 8 or so. Yes, they > recommend running 5 * #CPUs, but they also think their instances are > going to be around 20MB in size, but yours are running at 100+ MB size. > > You might find that running sa-update and sa-compile nightly might > improve your SpamAssassin performance; I've got a crontab setup which > runs the following nightly: > > % cat /usr/local/bin/update-spamassassin > #! /bin/sh > > PATH=$PATH:/usr/local/bin > > sa-update --allowplugins --gpgkey > D1C035168C1EBC08464946DA258CDB3ABDE9DC10 --channel > saupdates.openprotect.com --channel updates.spamassassin.org > sa-compile > > kill -HUP `cat /var/run/vscan/spamd.pid` > > (If you aren't running spamd because MailScanner uses builtin interface > to SpamAssassin, comment out the last line. But do check the sa-compile > docs, you have to make a change for it to be used....) > > Regards, I appologize I should have given more info. We do run sa-update, and sa-compile. We also run 0 scores on most DNSBL tests as we run those at the mta level along with milter-greylist, milter-ahead, pipelining rejection, and greet pause. We have been running a very trimmed down and fine tuned system for about two years now with good results. I do think the upgrade to SA 3.2.4 is very heavy, considerably more resource usage than 3.1.8 which we were running prior to the OS upgrade. I have not changed the settings for MailScanner from our previous install with respect to number of children or to batch size. Previous testing showed that 13 MS children with a batch size of 10 messages was optimal. I can certainly give that a try. I will look at enabling Hyperthreading as well. I've also found this, which may be a clue to the suggestion that a binary upgrade to 6.3 was a solution. DAve http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2007-April/070986.html -- 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.