X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569E69FA2C7; Mon, 29 May 2006 11:55:11 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17517-01; Mon, 29 May 2006 11:55:05 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mx-2.sollentuna.net (mx-2.sollentuna.net [195.84.163.199]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8DB9FA16E; Mon, 29 May 2006 11:55:05 -0300 (ADT) Received: from ALGOL.sollentuna.se (janus.sollentuna.se [62.65.68.67]) by mx-2.sollentuna.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5C58F28D; Mon, 29 May 2006 16:55:03 +0200 (CEST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [HACKERS] anoncvs still slow Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 16:55:02 +0200 Message-ID: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA3544F@algol.sollentuna.se> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [HACKERS] anoncvs still slow Thread-Index: AcaB1PGvDmzSBLlLTJ+H0ApcTvWDTQAtczZAACk+2YA= From: "Magnus Hagander" To: "Marc G. Fournier" , "Tom Lane" Cc: "Michael Fuhr" , X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200605/192 X-Sequence-Number: 10155 > > svr4 / anoncvs needs a major upgrade ... the problem is=20 > that the only=20 > > part of that vServer that I know nothing about is the bittorrent=20 > > stuff, which, in itself, needs an upgrade ... > > I sent a note to Magnus that, whenever he's ready with the=20 > bittorrent=20 > > stuff, I can do the rest of the upgrade, so its in his=20 > court right now=20 > > :) >=20 > Um, *what*? >=20 > AFAICS, this is caused by the machine attempting to relay=20 > thousands and thousands of spam emails (some quick checked=20 > showed a rate of about 1 spam / 5 seconds enytering the queue=20 > - and I know I deleted almost 20,000 from the queue) Actually, the rate appears to have gone down a little. But I still deleted about 15,000 new spams in the queue when I got back after the weekend. [moving this one over to -www, which is at least slightly more on topic for it] //Magnus