Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-18 Thread Lars Kristiansen
> >> Dual AMD 2400 + MP cpu >> Apache 2.0.53 >> UW Imap 2004e >> SM 1.4.4 >> PHP 4.3.9 - 32 b memory allocation - 30 sec timeout. > > Is the Apache 2/PHP considered production stable yet? The problems I whined about in the "me to" mail happened with a Redhat 8, which I do not have the opportunity

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-17 Thread Lars Kristiansen
> > Lars Kristiansen reportedly babbled: >>> Dual AMD 2400 + MP cpu Apache 2.0.53 UW Imap 2004e SM 1.4.4 PHP 4.3.9 - 32 b memory allocation - 30 sec timeout. >>> >>> Is the Apache 2/PHP considered production stable yet? >> >> The problems I whined about in the "me to" mail

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-15 Thread Paul Lesneiwski
David wrote: Dual AMD 2400 + MP cpu Apache 2.0.53 UW Imap 2004e SM 1.4.4 PHP 4.3.9 - 32 b memory allocation - 30 sec timeout. Is the Apache 2/PHP considered production stable yet? There was a big /. thread about that recently. There is some argument about it, but there are a LOT of people who

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-15 Thread Lars Kristiansen
> >> Dual AMD 2400 + MP cpu >> Apache 2.0.53 >> UW Imap 2004e >> SM 1.4.4 >> PHP 4.3.9 - 32 b memory allocation - 30 sec timeout. > > Is the Apache 2/PHP considered production stable yet? The problems I whined about in the "me to" mail happened with a Redhat 8, which I do not have the opportunity

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-15 Thread Jonathan Angliss
Hello Rich, On Tuesday, March 15, 2005, Rich Hall wrote... Have seen something similar when php hit its limits for execution-time or memory. [..] >> I believe I missed the beginning of this thread, so I'm jumping in >> mid-way, and will probably cover a few things. Have you tried >> se

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-15 Thread David
> Dual AMD 2400 + MP cpu > Apache 2.0.53 > UW Imap 2004e > SM 1.4.4 > PHP 4.3.9 - 32 b memory allocation - 30 sec timeout. Is the Apache 2/PHP considered production stable yet? David. > No shell accounts > Gobs of memory (4 gb) > Server side sorting on > > I just have not had a lot of time to d

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-15 Thread Rich Hall
Hi Jonathan, Jonathan Angliss reportedly babbled: > >>> Have seen something similar when php hit its limits for execution-time >>> or memory. > >>> To provoce it: search all mailboxes or upload a too big file. >>> Sorry for the little informative "me to" posting. It needs more >>> investigating.

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-14 Thread Jonathan Angliss
>> Have seen something similar when php hit its limits for execution-time >> or memory. >> To provoce it: search all mailboxes or upload a too big file. >> Sorry for the little informative "me to" posting. It needs more >> investigating. >> For what its worth: Could more or less avoid it by givi

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-14 Thread Paul Lesneiwski
Rich Hall wrote: Hi, Lars, Lars Kristiansen reportedly babbled: Have seen something similar when php hit its limits for execution-time or memory. To provoce it: search all mailboxes or upload a too big file. Sorry for the little informative "me to" posting. It needs more investigating. For what it

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-14 Thread Rich Hall
Hi, Lars, Lars Kristiansen reportedly babbled: > > Have seen something similar when php hit its limits for execution-time or > memory. > To provoce it: search all mailboxes or upload a too big file. > Sorry for the little informative "me to" posting. It needs more > investigating. > For what its

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-14 Thread Lars Kristiansen
> > Paul Lesneiwski reportedly babbled: >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Hi SM users, >>> >>> The problem: >>> >>> Intermittently SM would grab 100% of cpu. This was on a 4 processor >>> machine, >>> so /usr/bin/sar would show user-level cpu stepping up and down by 25%. >>> Sometimes reaching al

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-14 Thread Rich Hall
Paul Lesneiwski reportedly babbled: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Hi SM users, >> >> The problem: >> >> Intermittently SM would grab 100% of cpu. This was on a 4 processor machine, >> so /usr/bin/sar would show user-level cpu stepping up and down by 25%. >> Sometimes reaching all 4 cpus (100%).

Re: [SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-03-13 Thread Paul Lesneiwski
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi SM users, The problem: Intermittently SM would grab 100% of cpu. This was on a 4 processor machine, so /usr/bin/sar would show user-level cpu stepping up and down by 25%. Sometimes reaching all 4 cpus (100%). Systems staff would usually have to kill the runaway process

[SM-USERS] apache process running squirrelmail uses 100% cpu (resend)

2005-02-28 Thread sandydan
Hi SM users, The problem: Intermittently SM would grab 100% of cpu. This was on a 4 processor machine, so /usr/bin/sar would show user-level cpu stepping up and down by 25%. Sometimes reaching all 4 cpus (100%). Systems staff would usually have to kill the runaway process ids on Monday morning