Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: anoncvs still slow

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Michael Fuhr" <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: anoncvs still slow
Date: 2006-05-28 19:25:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> >> anoncvs (svr4, is still slow responding to "cvs 
> >> update"; it's been spotty for about a week now.  Tcpdump shows 
> >> connections being established but then long delays for ACKs, 
> >> sometimes long enough for cvs to time out.  Any updates on 
> what's going on?
> >
> > Magnus apparently knows what the problem is:
> >
> > but I haven't seen any of the "other mails" he mentioned.

Right, those mails were sent in private to Marc, because they outline
some fairly severe (IMHO) configuration errors on svr4 and at least one
other mailserver, that is the main reason behind the
problems. I didn't want those details to go out public and be archived.

> svr4 / anoncvs needs a major upgrade ... the problem is that 
> the only part of that vServer that I know nothing about is 
> the bittorrent stuff, which, in itself, needs an upgrade ... 
> I sent a note to Magnus that, whenever he's ready with the 
> bittorrent stuff, I can do the rest of the upgrade, so its in 
> his court right now :)

Um, *what*?

AFAICS, this is caused by the machine attempting to relay thousands and
thousands of spam emails (some quick checked showed a rate of about 1
spam / 5 seconds enytering the queue - and I know I deleted almost
20,000 from the queue)

This is a *configuration error*. if we *wanted* all this spam to be
relayed, it would be a performance problem. But to be efficient, the
spam has to be rejected *before* it enters the system. I've suggested a
couple of different things to be done to fix or at least decrease this
problem. From what I can tell, none have been implemented.

Now for the other problems, I propose the following:

For bittorrent, I propose we take it out. We've suggested it before, I
don't recall receiving any real requests to keep it, and IMHO it's way
much more pain than it's worth. Therefor, unless someone objects, I'll
pull the bittorrent links from the website in a couple of days, and then
we can just remove it from the server.

Also, if anoncvs is a problem that we need quickly fixed, can we mov eit
quickly to a different server. Say Ferengi, which has both bandwidth and
horsepower to spare in loads. Do we require some special-special version
of cvs, or just plain cvs?



pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2006-05-28 19:43:18
Subject: Re: LIKE, leading percent, bind parameters and indexes
Previous:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2006-05-28 18:35:49
Subject: Re: COPY FROM view

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group