Spam Filter ISP Support Forum

  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Problem with version 2.0.1.302
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Problem with version 2.0.1.302

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Problem with version 2.0.1.302
    Posted: 12 March 2004 at 9:58am

Oh no a problem.  Have been using version 1.+ of SpamFilter since sometime in August of last year without a problem.  Yesterday I upgraded to the new 2.0.1.302  version and this morning SpamFilter service ate all my memory and was maxing the CPU at 100%.  I remember reading in the forum someone else had this problem and removed the service and did it in stand alone mode to fix it.  I did that for now.  Any other things to try?  I really do not want to run it in stand alone mode for too long.

Hillard

 

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 12:12pm

Okay running in stand alone mode did not help.  SpamFilter program took all my memory and maxed out the CPU again.  I set the bayesian filter to 0% to see if that helps.

Hillard

 

Back to Top
Sean View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 21 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 81
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 1:52pm

COPY AND PASTE (AND MODIFIED) FROM PREVIOUS MESSAGE BY ME:

Check ensure you are actually running MDAC 2.8, and it has not been corrupted? SpamFilter users (Including myself) have found using the MDAC Component Checker that their install of MDAC had been down-revved by other applications (our culprit was Crystal Reports). Reinstalling MDAC 2.8, or higher should fix all leak issues (we are using MDAC 2.8 with no problems).

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 2:53pm

Thanks, I downloaded and installed the MDAC 2.8.  Hopefully that will fix the problem.  After install I ran the CC and it verified MDAC 2.8, I did not run it before install I am pretty sure I had version 2.6 something and not 2.8.

 

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 6:06pm

Okay the MDAC 2.8 upgrade did not help, after a few hours the CPU maxs and the memory usage triples.  Any other ideas?  Might have to go back to version 1, will really miss the attachment filter :(

Hillard

 

Back to Top
Sean View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 21 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 81
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 6:20pm
Did you restart the server after install MDAC 2.8? What version of Windows you using, and what type of Database?
Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 7:30pm

Yes restarted server.  Windows NT 4.0 with all patches.  What I did was set bayesian to 0% and after a few minutes the CPU and memory usage went back to normal levels.  It seems as long as I leave the bayesian off I am okay.  Oh, the database I am using is Access, I would think that is the next thing that might be causing the problem?

Hillard

Back to Top
George View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote George Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 March 2004 at 9:20pm

I would suggest upgrading to Windows 2000 server at the minimum. How much memory do you have. Is the server an older one or is it new? I have not had any of the problems you describe and have been running SF 2.302/MSSQL MDAC 2.8 since it was released.

I know that when I ran SF 1.2 on an NT 4.0 server it was rather slow. Once I put it on the 2000 server everything ran fast and error free.

I would also suggest using SQL instead of Access. Moving the data storage off the local hard drive will improve performance tremendously. When using Access the hard drive will have twice as much activity since both the queue folder and the database file will be written to at nearly or at the same time.

Back to Top
Desperado View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Desperado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2004 at 10:08am

Hillard,

Can you "indulge me"?  Please run wth the "Disable Connections Grid" check box NOT set and when the cpu goes high, are there a lot of RCPT TO's that are not going away?  Also, make sure that you go to the quarantine grid and "hide" the quarantine.

Thanks,

Dan S.  (SpamFilter User)

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2004 at 10:51am

>Can you "indulge me"?  Please run wth the "Disable Connections Grid" check box NOT >set and when the cpu goes high, are there a lot of RCPT TO's that are not going away?  >Also, make sure that you go to the quarantine grid and "hide" the quarantine.

Okay, I had both disabled or turned off.  I have turned back on the connections grid to watch it.  I do remember when it hits seeing a lot of  "Current Outbound Connections" and "Current Inbound Connections" when the problem is occuring.  Disable the bayesian and the numbers start coming down in a few minutes and so does the CPU and memory usage.  One other person recommended putting the quarantine on another server instead of the spam filter box and I know Access is not as good as SQL (I have some MySQL servers running that if I have to I can put the quarantine on them, I just was trying to keep it all on one server).

Hillard

 

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2004 at 10:59am

Oh, as I a side note when I turned connection grid back on all connections to the spam filter quit.  I restarted the service and it was okay, not sure why that happened?  Also noticed even though I had the bayesian turned of my server was using 360MB (it has 515MB) and when I restarted the spam filter service memory went down to 100MB.  I must have a memory leak going on with the spam filter service.  Again someone mentioned moving from NT (which is what it is and has been since August with version 1+) to 2000.

Hillard

 

Back to Top
Desperado View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Desperado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 March 2004 at 11:00am

Hillard,

I know nothing about access except that it has issues if it gets very large.  I am running MS-SQL on the same server as SpamFilter and have no problems in that area.  What I am looking for is with Bayes enabled, do you show a ton of "Stale" connections that do not seem to go away when your problem is happening?  If so, please email me directly at daseligmann at hotmail dot com.  We may have a common issue that has no obvious (yet) cause.  Also, do you have a feel for what your total daily message volume is?  And do you receive LOTS of large (10Meg plus) attachments?

Regards,

Dan S.

Back to Top
ASB View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ASB Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2004 at 1:31am

I would go to Windows 2000 or 2003, if possible.

If not, at least get away from Access (which version, btw?)      I'd go with MSDE or MySQL.

Version 2 of the SpamFilter flies under 2000 and 2003, using MSSQL, MSDE or MySQL...

Back to Top
ASB View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ASB Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2004 at 1:33am

You should be able to run the database on the same box without issue.

Back to Top
LogSat View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 25 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4065
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LogSat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2004 at 11:33am

Hillard,

We are in the process of testing internally build 306 which should help solve some memory issues. While it still has not been officially released, we have placed a link to it in the registered user's area. Could you please try this build to see if it solves any problems?

Roberto F.
LogSat Software

Back to Top
Desperado View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 27 January 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Desperado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2004 at 11:54am

Hillard,

In addition to what Roberto suggests (the 306) I really do not see that NT VS 2000 is an issue.  The 306 build addresses the issue I was eluding to in my previous post but I seemed to have the ONLY server having an issue that seems similar to yours.  I was hoping to find some similar quirk in our setups that would explain this.  I am on Win-2K so, again, I do not think NT is the issue. Try the 306 Build as Roberto said.  I have been running that build and have been reporting directly back to LogSat any operational Details.

Also, depending on the Database size, 512Meg MAY be a tad light.  I allow MS-SQL 1GIG and have 2GIGs on the server but I have a fairly large DB and somewhat highis traffic ... 50K messeges/day and am running 8 SpamFilter instances on the same machine.

Regards,

Dan S.

Back to Top
Dan B View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dan B Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 March 2004 at 9:57pm

Wow,  that is a lot of memory being used by SF.

On our servers when Bayesian is disabled the memory is 20-30MB without any trouble.
When our SF memory reaches above 300MB with Bayesian enabled, it starts acking strange. (It normally runs about 50-70MB) The memory climbs higher, the CPU will hang at 100% more often and the concurrent connections starts climbing and stay higher then normal until I restart SF service.

We have MS SQL sitting on its own 2000 server and the database size is in upwords of 25GB for only 4 days of retaining quarantine messages.

Dan B

 

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2004 at 2:30pm


|On our servers when Bayesian is disabled the memory is 20-30MB without any trouble.
|When our SF memory reaches above 300MB with Bayesian enabled, it starts acking |strange. (It normally runs about 50-70MB) The memory climbs higher, the CPU will hang |at 100% more often and the concurrent connections starts climbing and stay higher then |normal until I restart SF service.

Okay, that is what happens to me.  Without the bayesian filter running I run about 30MB for the SpamFiltersvc.  When I enable the bayesian the memory usage goes way up, even over 300MB and the CPU stays at 100% and the concurrent connections climb and stay high, this all takes a number of hours for it to hit. Sometimes I can get the numbers to go down when I turn off the bayesian and sometimes I have to turn off the bayesian and restart the service.

I installed the 306 patch and still got the same problem.

Another thing is even when I have the bayesian filter enabled I fail to see any messages marked as being found by it, only my keyword, other blacklists and reverse dns marked messages. My corpus is Spam=29171 and Good=56842; however, still nothing marked by it when I have it enabled.  Is this because I have keyword filter entries?

Hillard


 

Back to Top
Hillard Sarver View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hillard Sarver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2004 at 3:02pm

Scratch my last sentence in the post before this one.  I did find some bayesian marked messages in the quarantine before I had to turn it off.

Hillard

 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.