OK. It does seem like a browser issue. I'll work with the user to see if
we can clear it up.
Thanks, all.
Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Lesli St. Clair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I've asked the user to check her computer. She's using Saf
No, the ids are different, and on the server I see three separate
messages in the logs. In the apache logs on sqmail, I also see three
separate "compose" lines. The content, however, is identical.
Rainer Sokoll wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:03:02PM -0400, Lesli St
ting Send three times, etc.).
I've Googled and searched lists, but it's not an easy topic with unique
keywords.
Marc Powell wrote:
...
--
***
Lesli St. Clair
Systems Administrator
Ithaca College
607-274-1000
--
I'm not following; why would that cause my sqmail server to send three
times?
Marc Powell wrote:
> I know this sounds like a strange suggestion but check the date/time on
> the senders computer. I'll bet it is very wrong.
>
> --
> Marc
>
>
--
with Safari) or with a public kiosk. None of the
messages she's sent to me have been duplicated, but the above example was
sent to a colleague in IT.
We're running 1.4.9.
Thanks.
--
Lesli St. Clair
Systems Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
I didn't see errors in any of the logs, unfortuantely. I had a
suspiscion earlier that that might be the problem, but the parameters I
used were given to me by a Sun guy who set up some machines, and they
were defintely wrong. Now I know better.
John Madden wrote:
set rlim_fd_max=8192
Since you're running FreeBSD, my solution may not work for you, but ...
check your file handles!
Viren Patel wrote:
I have been following this thread with great interest.
Here are my 4 cents. We have a webmail setup as follows:
Dual AMD Athlon MP 2400 w/ 1 GB RAM
RAID 5 (3 ATA133 7200 RPM d
Well, whatever goes on when users log in, file handles/descriptors
must play a role. On the advice of a member group, I changed them in
/etc/system to:
set rlim_fd_max=8192
set rlim_fd_cur=1024
I had used settings recommended by Sun (no comment!). So far, so good.
The load testing software has
Peter P. Benac wrote:
Sorry for picking this thread up late, but I was curious if you have run any
performance monitoring tools on this box or are you just assuming the SM is
the culprit. At the very least have you run and monitored TOP on this
machine to see who your top processes are.
I'm using
Thanks, but we use ldap (on another box) for logins.
SqM wrote:
I ran into something similar with high load on a web server
hosting homepages.. Load in the 40's..
If you have the user data base in NIS.. (i.e. passwd)
Make sure that you do not have it in the password file as well..
Or.. Make sure th
Not a larger percentage, no.
I just did an experiment with the load testing software.
I had it run a 500-user session with users logging in 5 seconds apart.
The 4-CPU machine didn't go crazy--but the CPU was used up pretty well
and the LA hit about 8-12.
Then I changed the parameters to 500 user
Always from source! And yes, fresh php, too. It was an untouched machine
that hadn't been used for anything else.
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Lesli St. Clair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I thought of that, but I tried a fresh install of apache 2.x
From source?
What about PHP?
begin:vcard
13M sleep0:14 1.33% httpd
6839 httpd 1 520 19M 17M sleep0:15 1.31% httpd
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Lesli St. Clair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Fresh install of apache 1.3x, SM, and mysql, but the same revs etc.
Maybe a bug in the software? I've seen that on RH syste
Fresh install of apache 1.3x, SM, and mysql, but the same revs etc.
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Lesli St. Clair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I was absolutely convinced that something was misconfigured when I saw
the LA over 80. So I moved it to anther, identical machine and got the
same thing.
2004 11:21:56 -0500, Lesli St. Clair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi All,
I've been struggling with SquirrelMail for two months. At about 300
users, the CPU is maxed out and the load average on a dual-Ghz CPU Sun
machine climbs into the 80s. I moved it to a larger, 4-processor box and
did l
John Madden wrote:
First off, I'd recommend not using Sun hardware for this sort of thing -
mid-range intels will blow the doors of of sparcs for this sort of
processing. Secondly, we have to consider how this load testing software
works -- what, exactly, is it doing within SM? We support about
I suspect it is the SM/iPlanet combo. But I can't change our email
infrastructure just for a webmail interface. I'm disappointed, because I
do like SM.
Norrin Radd wrote:
Lesli st. Clair,
Sorry to hear about your pain and suffering. Although
I have only fractions of expertise of the
Hi All,
I've been struggling with SquirrelMail for two months. At about 300
users, the CPU is maxed out and the load average on a dual-Ghz CPU Sun
machine climbs into the 80s. I moved it to a larger, 4-processor box and
did load testing with software. It appears that the 4 processor machine
wou
r configuration? With or without similar
problems?
Tomas Kuliavas wrote:
Lesli St. Clair paraÅÄ:
All,
I have SM running on a Sun 280, dual processor, 4 GB machines, Sol 8,
apache 1.3.7, php 4.3.2. We're using a variety of plugins for ldap
connectivity, including some home grown (though removing t
--
--
1 & 2 were done during installation.
>
> 3. conf.pl -> 8. Plugins -> filters should not be installed
The filter plugin was installed. I'll test without, but I assumed removing
the plugin was a "tuning" issue, not the difference between a smooth
running machine and a system collapsing unde
I tend to agree. I'm (trying) to run SM on a dual processor Sun with 4
GB, solely as a web client (IMAP and smtp are elsewhere) and 300 or so
simultaneous users uses up all the processor. And that's with a PHP
accellerator (Zend). I'm still poling around trying to find some way to
make this wor
All,
I have SM running on a Sun 280, dual processor, 4 GB machines, Sol 8,
apache 1.3.7, php 4.3.2. We're using a variety of plugins for ldap
connectivity, including some home grown (though removing them doesn't
cure the problem).
I'm seeing full CPU usage and load averages out of site once we
22 matches
Mail list logo
