HTTP/2 200 cache-control: max-age=43200 server: Combust/Plack (Perl) vary: Accept-Encoding content-encoding: gzip content-length: 2106 content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 last-modified: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 03:50:15 GMT date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 03:50:15 GMT strict-transport-security: max-age=15768000 Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from August 2008

Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial(Senescent?) reflective pause)

Thread Previous | Thread Next

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 04:15:49PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> 
> I do have another Perl-spin bug/problem related, but I am pretty sure 
> this is some pessimal combo of input data and processing code.  Here's
> an example of it:
> 
>       UID   PID  PPID CPU PRI NI   VSZ   RSS WCHAN   STAT TT       TIME COMMAND
> 	0  2463  3795   0   2 20 44920 10020 poll   I     ??   14:42.02 perl5.10.0: spamd child (perl5.10.0)
> 
> Nearly 15 minutes CPU time to process one message?!
> 
> That's SpamAssassin's spamd(1) servicing a spamc(1) client.  I figure
> that somewhere there must be a regex in SpamAssassin that could use
> nonbacktracking, whether (?>...) or possessive quantifiers or perhaps
> the new "backtracking control verbs".  
> 
> But I don't know where it is, and haven't the patience to track 
> it down.  So I just kill those off when they take too long.
My usual first approach is something like
    $SIG{USR2} = \&Carp::cluck; # or \&Carp::confess;
Tim.

Thread Previous | Thread Next

• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Johan Vromans
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by chromatic
• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight againstspam deluge) by Aristotle Pagaltzis
• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Johan Vromans
• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Ben Morrow
• Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial (Senescent?) reflective pause) by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial(Senescent?) reflective pause) by Tim Bunce
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial (Senescent?) reflective pause) by jm
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial (Senescent?) reflective pause) by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge (was: Senatorial (Senescent?) reflective pause) by jvromans
• Diamond iteration (was: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Diamond iteration (was: Fighting the Good Fight against spamdeluge) by Abigail
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Roland Giersig
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Johan Vromans
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by chromatic
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by H.Merijn Brand
• Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Johan Vromans
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Roland Giersig
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by jvromans
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Johan Vromans
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by Roland Giersig
• Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge by H.Merijn Brand
• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Johan Vromans
• Re: Iterator::Diamond (Was: Re: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by David Nicol
• Re: Diamond iteration (was: Fighting the Good Fight against spam deluge) by Tom Christiansen
• Re: Diamond iteration (was: Fighting the Good Fight against spamdeluge) by H.Merijn Brand