Bug 3484 - spamc not always setting exit code
Summary: spamc not always setting exit code
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Spamassassin
Classification: Unclassified
Component: spamc/spamd (show other bugs)
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Hardware: Other other
: P2 major
Target Milestone: 3.1.0
Assignee: SpamAssassin Developer Mailing List
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-06-07 12:41 UTC by Dallas Engelken
Modified: 2004-06-16 06:00 UTC (History)
0 users


Attachment Type Modified Status Actions Submitter/CLA Status
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Dallas Engelken 2004-06-07 12:41:36 UTC 
I'm trying to locate why I'm not getting an exit code from spamc about 10% of
the time??  I see nothing in debug that would indicate any type of failure...   

[root@mailgw root]# grep SPAMASSASSIN /var/log/qmail-debug.log | tail -40
2004-06-07 13:20:02:17873: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:20:05:17907: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:21:14:17971: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:22:48:18046: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:22:58:18072: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:24:42:18159: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:25:27:18245: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:28:27:18383: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:30:27:18524: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:30:24:18513: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:30:50:18547: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:30:55:18565: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:36:48:18894: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:37:53:18950: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:39:28:18979: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:40:08:19060: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:40:04:19048: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:40:14:19086: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:40:45:19115: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:41:06:19164: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:41:47:19204: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:41:57:19223: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  74
2004-06-07 13:42:40:19261: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:44:13:19387: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:45:27:19457: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:46:01:19469: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:47:01:19542: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:47:41:19572: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:49:43:19625: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:50:26:19678: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 13:52:53:19782: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:58:16:19988: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 13:59:38:20072: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:00:49:20194: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 14:01:58:20239: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:04:39:20556: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:04:59:20603: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:05:26:20657: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:
2004-06-07 14:08:39:20873: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:09:09:20903: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0

running latest SVN... didnt ever see this problem previously.

On a 2.63 spamc client connecting to a 3.0-SVN spamd, i get an exit code every
time... so this must be on the spamc side.

[root@mail1 root]# grep SPAMASSASSIN /var/log/qmail-debug.log  | tail -40
2004-06-07 14:38:13:13653: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:16:13687: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:17:13710: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:20:13730: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:20:13739: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:23:13769: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:24:13778: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:23:13767: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:34:13830: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:36:13839: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:36:13850: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:40:13872: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:49:13905: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:51:13925: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:53:13949: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:54:13963: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:56:14023: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:56:14016: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:55:14012: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:57:14053: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:57:14051: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:00:14101: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:52:13947: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:00:14114: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:00:14115: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:02:14153: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:06:14173: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:07:14186: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:07:14184: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:38:57:14057: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:08:14199: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:06:14183: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:14:14271: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:15:14283: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:15:14280: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:19:14329: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:22:14353: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:22:14354: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:17:14307: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
2004-06-07 14:39:27:14398: SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:  0
Comment 1 Sidney Markowitz 2004-06-07 18:03:30 UTC 
What does "no status code" mean? A program always returns some status code, even
if it is 0? Is that log part of qmail, and if so what is there in between
"SPAMASSASSIN STATUS:" being written and the return code from spamc being written?
Comment 2 Malte S. Stretz 2004-06-08 02:06:39 UTC 
The only reason which comes to my mind why spamc might look as if it doesn't 
return a status code is if it either crashes or hits some timeout. Can't tell 
without knowing qmail's logging code though. We need some more data points on 
this, like mail logs from spamc/spamd for the corresponding queries...
Comment 3 Dallas Engelken 2004-06-15 15:19:14 UTC 
has the memory footprint of spamc changed much going from 2.63 to 3.0?  

i believe my softlimit is what is causing this... i bumped it up a little and i 
think the problems have all but gone away.   everything is exiting 0 now.
Comment 4 Malte S. Stretz 2004-06-15 15:49:59 UTC 
I don't think it has changed that much but maybe we've introduced some race 
condition which goes and eats up memory somewhere in there?
Comment 5 Dallas Engelken 2004-06-16 13:27:55 UTC 
well, whatever it was... i can no longer reproduce with an slightly increased 
softlimit.   resolved for now.
Comment 6 Malte S. Stretz 2004-06-16 13:49:00 UTC 
Just to have some data points if we ever need to reopen this bug: What was 
your old softlimit and to what did you change it?
Comment 7 Dallas Engelken 2004-06-16 14:00:35 UTC 
qmail-smtpd which calls spamc and uvscan via qmail-scanner was softlimited at
16mb...  i'm now running 20mb softlimit.  the uvscan engine version has not
changed, the the qmail-scanner version has not changed.  

now that i think about it, i did add SPF support into my qmail-smtpd around the
same time i went to SA3.0, so that may be whats responsible for the memory increase.