Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:07:49 -0700 | From | "Jeff V. Merkey" <> | Subject | Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in /var/spool/mqueue |
| |
David Lang wrote: > > how many CPUs in these high loadave boxes? unless you have a very > impressive machine (8+SMP) the defaults should be plenty high. > > also I thought the QueueLA default was 8 and the RefuseLA was 12 or have > they been bumped up since I last examined them (8.8/8.9 timeframes)
I think this may be related to VM activity. I looked at /proc/meminfo and the sendmail sickness seems directly related to heavy VM activity in the box. This may be one for Rik/Linus. I'm just trying to get Ute-NWFS out the door and want stuff to work.
:-)
Jeff
> > David Lang > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > > > Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 14:52:01 -0700 > > From: Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > To: sendmail-bugs@sendmail.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: sendmail fails to deliver mail with attachments in > > /var/spool/mqueue > > > > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > We got to the bottom of the sendmail problem. The line: > > > > -O QueueLA=20 > > > > and > > > > -O RefuseLA=18 > > > > Need to be cranked up in sendmail.cf to something high since the > > background VM on a very busy Linux box seems to exceed this which causes > > large emails to get stuck in the /var/spool/mqueue directory for long > > periods of time. Since vger is getting hammered with FTP all the time, > > and is rarely idle. This also explains what Richard was seeing with VM > > thrashing in a box with low memory. > > > > The problem of dropping connections on 2.4 was related to the O RefuseLA > > settings. The defaults in the RedHat, Suse, and OpenLinux RPMs are > > clearly set too low for modern Linux kernels. You may want them cranked > > up to 100 or something if you want sendmail to always work. > > > > Jeff > > > > "Jeff V. Merkey" wrote: > > > > > > Claus, > > > > > > This is a bug. emails should not get stuck in the mail queue because > > > your load averaging routine doesn't work right. If this is so, then why > > > do some emails (small ones) get through and big ones do not, > > > irreguardless of delivery order. If it were a loading problem one would > > > think emails would still get processed in the order they arrived, not > > > some arbitrary "order from hell" which is what was happening. This is > > > severely broken IMHO and you need to fix it. > > > > > > Jeff > > > > > > Claus Assmann wrote: > > > > > > > > All of these entries have an 'X': > > > > > > > > > Mail Queue (11 requests) > > > > > --Q-ID-- --Size-- -Priority- ---Q-Time--- -----------Sender/Recipient----------- > > > > > FAA15716X 31418 200564 Nov 9 05:01 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <linux-archive@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > FAA20318X 32693 201751 Nov 10 05:29 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <linux-archive@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > SAA01998X 34484 203865 Nov 6 18:20 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <linux-archive@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > QAA01341X 65091 204150 Nov 6 16:50 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <mharris@opensourceadvocate.org> > > > > > SAA13390X 41368 210478 Nov 8 18:03 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <linux-archive@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > LAA03425X 158115 218595 Nov 6 11:27 <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <Mark.Coe@rrd.com> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> > > > > > QAA01343X 65091 234150 Nov 6 16:50 <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org> > > > > > 7BIT > > > > > <linux-archive@timpanogas.org> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > KAA21225X 205041 235799 Nov 10 10:26 <paperboy@g2news.com> > > > > > 8BITMIME > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> > > > > > FAA20229X 1457 272283+Nov 10 05:01 <mharris@opensourceadvocate.org> > > > > > (Warning: could not send message for past 1 hour) > > > > > <andre@linux-ide.org> > > > > > QAA06681X 242511 272929 Nov 7 16:18 <jmerkey@timpanogas.org> > > > > > 8BITMIME > > > > > <andre@timpanogas.org> > > > > > PAA12261X 576306 606701 Nov 8 15:06 <langus@timpanogas.com> > > > > > <jmerkey@timpanogas.com> > > > > > > > > That is, the load on your machine is too high. > > > > 3:27pm up 29 min, 2 users, load average: 10.00, 9.97, 8.50 > > > > > > > > It seems as if this is broken, top shows 2 running processes > > > > and 67 sleeping. > > > > > > > > If you run the queue with -O QueueLA=20 the entries are processed. > > > > So you have to change your configuration to deal with the "high" > > > > load, which I did right now by editing your .cf file. > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |