Mailing List Archive: SpamAssassin: users

spamd SIGCHLD

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

jolumape_al at hotmail

Nov 11, 2009, 9:49 AM

Post #1 of 15 (2283 views)
Permalink

spamd SIGCHLD

Dear Sirs,

In reviewing log of SA I found that there are many messages of this type:

[22109] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 22384 due to SIGCHLD

What is causing these messages?

SA is installed on the server:

ML110 G4
Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz
1GB RAM

spamd options:

/usr/bin/spamd -v -u vpopmail -m 10 -x -q -s stderr -r /var/run/spamd/spamd.pid -i 172.16.10.20 -A 172.16.10.0/24 2>&1 | \

Thanks

Jose Luis

_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

jolumape_al at hotmail

Nov 11, 2009, 12:19 PM

Post #2 of 15 (2222 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Dear Sir,

Some additional data.

I am running debugging and got these messages:

@400000004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
@400000004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 3
@400000004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
@400000004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing, too many idle children (3 > 2), killed 13018
@400000004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited
@400000004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering state 4
@400000004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
@400000004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD
@400000004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
@400000004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection
@400000004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II

Any comments?

Thanks

Jose Luis

From: jolumape_al [at] hotmail
To: users [at] spamassassin
Subject: spamd SIGCHLD
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:49:22 -0500

Dear Sirs,

In reviewing log of SA I found that there are many messages of this type:

[22109] info: spamd: handled cleanup of child pid 22384 due to SIGCHLD

What is causing these messages?

SA is installed on the server:

ML110 G4
Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz
1GB RAM

spamd options:

/usr/bin/spamd -v -u vpopmail -m 10 -x -q -s stderr -r /var/run/spamd/spamd.pid -i 172.16.10.20 -A 172.16.10.0/24 2>&1 | \

Thanks

Jose Luis

Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!
_________________________________________________________________
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy!
http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us

Bowie_Bailey at BUC

Nov 11, 2009, 12:30 PM

Post #3 of 15 (2216 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> Dear Sir,
>
> Some additional data.
>
> I am running debugging and got these messages:
>
> @400000004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
> @400000004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
> state 3
> @400000004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> @400000004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing,
> too many idle children (3 > 2), killed 13018
> @400000004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited
> @400000004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
> state 4
> @400000004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> @400000004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of
> child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD
> @400000004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> @400000004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection
> @400000004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II
>
> Any comments?

This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle
children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly
as new children are created and old children are removed.

--
Bowie

jolumape_al at hotmail

Nov 12, 2009, 6:31 AM

Post #4 of 15 (2211 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Thanks Bowie,

It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?

Thanks

Jose Luis

> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> From: Bowie_Bailey [at] BUC
> To: users [at] spamassassin
> Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
>
> Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> > Dear Sir,
> >
> > Some additional data.
> >
> > I am running debugging and got these messages:
> >
> > @400000004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
> > @400000004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
> > state 3
> > @400000004afb1ab22375e75c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> > @400000004afb1ab223aa9b8c [12572] dbg: prefork: adjust: decreasing,
> > too many idle children (3 > 2), killed 13018
> > @400000004afb1ab223d2d46c [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: just exited
> > @400000004afb1ab223d2e7f4 [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering
> > state 4
> > @400000004afb1ab223d2fb7c [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> > @400000004afb1ab223d30b1c [12572] info: spamd: handled cleanup of
> > child pid 13018 due to SIGCHLD
> > @400000004afb1ab223d31ea4 [12572] dbg: prefork: new lowest idle kid: 12580
> > @400000004afb1ab223d3322c [12572] dbg: prefork: child closed connection
> > @400000004afb1ab223d341cc [12572] info: prefork: child states: II
> >
> > Any comments?
>
> This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle
> children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly
> as new children are created and old children are removed.
>
> --
> Bowie

_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

jhardin at impsec

Nov 12, 2009, 6:39 AM

Post #5 of 15 (2208 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:

> It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?

Not just to make the SIGCHLD warnings go away. The decision is based on
your email volume and available resources (CPU, RAM, etc.)

Take a look at your memory allocation and swap usage. If your server is
not running near its load limit, sure, add some more child processes. When
you start hitting swap, or otherwise start seeing performance degradation,
take a few off.

--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin [at] impsec FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin [at] impsec
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gun Control enables genocide while doing little to reduce crime.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
34 days since President Obama won the Nobel "Not George W. Bush" prize

Bowie_Bailey at BUC

Nov 12, 2009, 6:42 AM

Post #6 of 15 (2210 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> > From: Bowie_Bailey [at] BUC
> > To: users [at] spamassassin
> > Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
> >
> >
> > This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle
> > children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly
> > as new children are created and old children are removed.
> >
> > --
> > Bowie
> Thanks Bowie,
>
> It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?

That depends on your mail flow and how much RAM you have on the
machine. If your mail is going through without any delays, then you
should probably leave it as-is. Generally the maximum setting is more
interesting than the minimum in any case.

--
Bowie

jolumape_al at hotmail

Nov 12, 2009, 6:48 AM

Post #7 of 15 (2207 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Dear John,

Thanks, now I have the concept more clear about this.

Jose Luis

I'm more clear about this.

> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:39:08 -0800
> From: jhardin [at] impsec
> To: users [at] spamassassin
> CC: bowie_bailey [at] buc
> Subject: RE: spamd SIGCHLD
>
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
>
> > It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
>
> Not just to make the SIGCHLD warnings go away. The decision is based on
> your email volume and available resources (CPU, RAM, etc.)
>
> Take a look at your memory allocation and swap usage. If your server is
> not running near its load limit, sure, add some more child processes. When
> you start hitting swap, or otherwise start seeing performance degradation,
> take a few off.
>
> --
> John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
> jhardin [at] impsec FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin [at] impsec
> key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Gun Control enables genocide while doing little to reduce crime.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 34 days since President Obama won the Nobel "Not George W. Bush" prize

_________________________________________________________________
Explore the seven wonders of the world
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

jolumape_al at hotmail

Nov 12, 2009, 7:09 AM

Post #8 of 15 (2208 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

Dear Bowie,

I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.

Thanks

Jose Luis

> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:42:36 -0500
> From: Bowie_Bailey [at] BUC
> To: users [at] spamassassin
> Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
>
> Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> > > From: Bowie_Bailey [at] BUC
> > > To: users [at] spamassassin
> > > Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
> > >
> > >
> > > This is just the normal child cleanup. You have set a maximum of 2 idle
> > > children, so when there were 3, it killed one. This happens constantly
> > > as new children are created and old children are removed.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bowie
> > Thanks Bowie,
> >
> > It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
>
> That depends on your mail flow and how much RAM you have on the
> machine. If your mail is going through without any delays, then you
> should probably leave it as-is. Generally the maximum setting is more
> interesting than the minimum in any case.
>
> --
> Bowie

_________________________________________________________________
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy!
http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us

uhlar at fantomas

Nov 12, 2009, 7:34 AM

Post #9 of 15 (2211 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm
> monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.

grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs do you
need.

--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar [at] fantomas ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Due to unexpected conditions Windows 2000 will be released
in first quarter of year 1901

uhlar at fantomas

Nov 12, 2009, 8:27 AM

Post #10 of 15 (2203 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

> On 12.11.09 10:09, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> > I have increased the maximum amount of SPARE to 5 (--max-spare=5) and I'm
> > monitoring the behavior of the RAM and SWAP.

On 12.11.09 16:34, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> grep your spamd log for 'shild' to have some hints how much of childs do you
> need.

Ops, "child" of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need
many spare spamd's.

And your memory status is important to limit the maximum number of spamd's,
not spare spamd's.

--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar [at] fantomas ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Your mouse has moved. Windows NT will now restart for changes to take
to take effect. [OK]

kremels at kreme

Nov 12, 2009, 8:58 AM

Post #11 of 15 (2207 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:

> Ops, "child" of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need
> many spare spamd's.

I see things like:

spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS
spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ
spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child
spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child

(based on a sort -u of the current maillog)

--
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.

uhlar at fantomas

Nov 12, 2009, 9:12 AM

Post #12 of 15 (2205 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

> On 12-Nov-2009, at 09:27, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> > Ops, "child" of course. Unless you need many spamd processes, you don't need
> > many spare spamd's.

On 12.11.09 09:58, LuKreme wrote:
> I see things like:
>
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS
> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ
> spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child
> spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child
>
> (based on a sort -u of the current maillog)

If you do this over all week, you can safely restrict max number of spamd
processes to 5. If you have enough of memory, you can use higher number but
you surely don't need more then default values for max-spare (2) and
min-spare (1) spamd processes
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar [at] fantomas ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
It's now safe to throw off your computer.

dbfunk at engineering

Nov 12, 2009, 11:42 AM

Post #13 of 15 (2202 views)
Permalink

RE: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:

>
> Thanks Bowie,
>
> It would be good idea to increase the maximum amount of SPARE?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jose Luis
>
> > Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:30:58 -0500
> > From: Bowie_Bailey [at] BUC
> > To: users [at] spamassassin
> > Subject: Re: spamd SIGCHLD
> >
> > Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
> > > Dear Sir,
> > >
> > > Some additional data.
> > >
> > > I am running debugging and got these messages:
> > >
> > > @400000004afb1ab22375c434 [12572] info: prefork: child states: III
> > > @400000004afb1ab22375d7bc [12572] dbg: prefork: child 13018: entering

Jose,
One other way to deal with this would be to change the spamd process
model. I had similar issues on my spamd setup and changing to the "round
robin" proces model (similar to the Apache v2 approach) took care of
it. Try using the "--round-robin" spamd argument.
You may want to experiment with the "-m" and "--max-conn-per-child"
options to fine-tune it.

--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{

kremels at kreme

Nov 12, 2009, 11:51 AM

Post #14 of 15 (2206 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

On 12-Nov-2009, at 10:12, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BB
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBI
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBII
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBS
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BBSI
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BI
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BII
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIII
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: BIS
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IB
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: II
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: III
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIK
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIS
>> spamd[10989]: prefork: child states: IIZ
>> spamd[10989]: spamd: handled cleanup of child
>> spamd[10989]: spamd: server successfully spawned child
>>
>> (based on a sort -u of the current maillog)
>
> If you do this over all week, you can safely restrict max number of spamd
> processes to 5. If you have enough of memory, you can use higher number but
> you surely don't need more then default values for max-spare (2) and
> min-spare (1) spamd processes

I guess I just don't understand what these various notes mean. II? BB? BBSI?

--
And there were all the stars, looking remarkably like powered diamonds spilled on black velvet, the stars that lured and ultimately called the boldest towards them... --Colour of Magic

tibbs at math

Nov 12, 2009, 11:57 AM

Post #15 of 15 (2203 views)
Permalink

Re: spamd SIGCHLD [In reply to]

>>>>> "L" == LuKreme <kremels [at] kreme> writes:

L> I guess I just don't understand what these various notes mean. II?
L> BB? BBSI?

lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/SpamdForkScaling.pm, look for $statestr.
I=idle, B=busy, K=killed, E=error, S=starting, Z="GOT_SIGCHLD" (probably
zombie), ?=anything else.

- J<

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads