X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3C3DB56B for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:49:49 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77026-03 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:49:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from electrum.sraapowergres.com (electrum.sraapowergres.com [66.199.248.114]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C126DB411 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:49:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from toronto-HSE-ppp4041672.sympatico.ca (toronto-HSE-ppp4041672.sympatico.ca [70.48.186.218]) by electrum.sraapowergres.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D82F560FE for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:53:00 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Bernier To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Runaway zope on svr2? Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 14:50:30 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E7D6@algol.sollentuna.se> In-Reply-To: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E7D6@algol.sollentuna.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200510311450.31018.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.049 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049] X-Spam-Score: 0.049 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200510/126 X-Sequence-Number: 8714 On Monday 31 October 2005 14:10, Magnus Hagander wrote: > There is a zope process running there at about 90% CPU usage, which > appears to have been pegged there for quite a whlie - it's used up 7500 > hours of CPU time since Oct 24th. Somebody who knows about that one > mshould probably look into that one ASAP :-) > > It's used for techdocsl, but it certainly shouldn't look like that... > I think I have this wrong but wasn't there a php exploit recently reported that affected zope? Can somebody clarify this? cheers Robert