On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 10:07:32AM +0000, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:53:10AM +0200, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 09:46:35AM +0000, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 11:17:15AM +0200, Petar Bogdanovic wrote:
> > > [SPF may be the culprit for memory leaks]
> > >
> > > Which libspf do you use? We support 3 of them.
> >
> > libspf_alt
> > I will try mail/libspf2 from pkgsrc but which one is the third one?
>
> libspf (neither alt, nor 2)
>
> Reading the documentation, it seems that for libspf, SPF_close does not
> free memory,and free() must be called on the peer_info_t obtained from
> SPF_init(). Anyone can confirm?
It apparently has nothing to do with libspf since I get similar results
with libspf_alt and libspf2 (1.2.8). The situation even got worse with
libspf2 from another point of view -- milter-greylist using libspf_alt
claimed about 15% of the CPU when it had to deal with 900 simultaneous
connections while the same situation ate every second of the available
CPU-time when linked against libspf2. That's why I wasn't able to drop
the same amounth of mails through milter-greylist+libspf2: the CPU was
the bottleneck.
milter-greylist + libspf2
3008K 1248K sigwait 0:00 0.00% 0.00% <-- mg started
3404K 3272K RUN 0:07 65.73% 27.83% <-- 900 sim. connections
3520K 3388K RUN 0:21 191.17% 63.09%
3624K 3492K RUN 0:35 96.25% 80.37%
3736K 3604K RUN 0:49 103.25% 89.31%
3848K 3716K RUN 1:03 99.97% 93.60%
3964K 3832K RUN 1:17 98.97% 95.51%
4072K 3940K RUN 1:31 97.95% 96.34%
4188K 4056K RUN 1:45 98.26% 97.12%
4304K 4172K RUN 1:59 97.56% 97.12%
4400K 4268K RUN 2:13 97.41% 96.97%
4520K 4388K RUN 2:27 97.54% 97.12%
4620K 4488K RUN 2:41 97.28% 97.12%
4728K 4596K RUN 2:56 97.58% 97.31%
4840K 4708K RUN 3:10 96.79% 96.73%
4936K 4804K RUN 3:24 96.84% 96.73%
5056K 4924K RUN 3:38 96.48% 96.44%
5188K 5052K RUN 3:52 95.69% 95.65%
5288K 5156K RUN 4:06 94.99% 94.97%
5416K 5284K RUN 4:20 94.83% 94.82%
5520K 5388K RUN 4:35 95.27% 95.26%
5652K 5520K RUN 4:49 114.61% 95.70%
5768K 5636K RUN 5:03 96.19% 96.19%
5872K 5744K RUN 5:17 103.06% 97.12%
milter-greylist + libspf_alt
3008K 1248K sigwait 0:00 0.00% 0.00% <-- mg started
3584K 3648K sigwait 0:03 29.87% 15.77% <-- 900 sim. connections
4008K 4100K sigwait 0:04 15.45% 12.01%
4568K 4676K sigwait 0:06 14.30% 12.79%
5112K 5220K sigwait 0:08 14.95% 14.21%
5656K 5764K sigwait 0:09 14.00% 13.67%
6180K 6296K sigwait 0:11 14.96% 14.79%
6704K 6824K sigwait 0:12 14.14% 14.06%
7272K 7392K RUN 0:14 14.63% 14.50%
7752K 7872K sigwait 0:16 13.59% 13.57%
8308K 8428K sigwait 0:17 14.17% 14.16%
8876K 8996K sigwait 0:19 14.90% 14.89%
9408K 9528K sigwait 0:21 15.87% 15.87%
9960K 10M sigwait 0:22 15.63% 15.62%
10M 10M sigwait 0:24 16.16% 16.16%Message
Re: [milter-greylist] DOes SPF cause memory leak?
2008-10-23 by Petar Bogdanovic
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.