On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:04:12 +0000, Frederik Himpe wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:29:57 +0000, Greg Lee wrote: > >> On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:01:59 +0000, Frederik Himpe wrote: >> >>> I am using x86_64 bit Linux on an Athlon 64 3500. >>> >>> Any idea how I could debug this? >> >> No, but I do see all these problems, and I'm also using x86_64 Linux. >> Before I started using Pan, I was using Tin, which is considerably >> worse than Pan at doing comparable things. Also, Tin would use all my >> system's memory, which Pan does not do. > > I cannot really imagine how another application can be still be > "considerably worse" than this. I just tried filtering for CFS in one > month of linux kernel mailing list, and I killed it again after several > minutes of 100% CPU time. Pan has become completely unusable for me now: > it was certainly not like that before, otherwise I would never used it > for months without noticing and complaining... Could it be a regression > in 0.132?
Filtering on thousands of headers takes less than one second on my 32-bit Athlon 2200, so it may have something to do with the 64-bit thing. Did you both build your own pan using a 64-bit compiler, or are you running 32-bit pan? Is your swapspace filling up during the stalls? Disk thrashing? Does the filtering always complete if you wait long enough? _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
