You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Justin Mason <jm...@jmason.org> on 2008/09/08 15:38:47 UTC

using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

have you seen this?

  http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/

That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down SpamAssassin,
too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?

--j.

RE: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by "Randal, Phil" <pr...@herefordshire.gov.uk>.
Andrew Hearn wrote:
> Justin Mason wrote:
>> have you seen this?
>> 
>>   http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
>> 
>> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down
>> SpamAssassin, too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
>> 
>> --j.
>> 
> 
> This fixed it for me on a couple of centos servers:
> 
> http://people.centos.org/z00dax/bz379791/

Did you notice a real-world performance boost after doing that?  Got any
numbers for pre- and post- spamassassin performance?

Phil

-- 
Phil Randal
Networks Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK

Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by Andrew Hearn <an...@aaisp.net.uk>.
Randal, Phil wrote:
> Andrew Hearn wrote:
>> Justin Mason wrote:
>>> have you seen this?
>>>
>>>   http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
>>>
>>> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down
>>> SpamAssassin, too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
>>>
>>> --j.
>>>
>> This fixed it for me on a couple of centos servers:
>>
>> http://people.centos.org/z00dax/bz379791/
> 
> Did you notice a real-world performance boost after doing that?  Got any
> numbers for pre- and post- spamassassin performance?
> 

No, not that I've noticed yet anyway ;-)

Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by Andrew Hearn <an...@aaisp.net.uk>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> have you seen this?
> 
>   http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
> 
> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down SpamAssassin,
> too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
> 
> --j.
> 

This fixed it for me on a couple of centos servers:

http://people.centos.org/z00dax/bz379791/

RE: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by "Randal, Phil" <pr...@herefordshire.gov.uk>.
Jason Bertoch wrote:
> However, Centos 5.2 32-bit and perl 5.8.8 chokes:
> 
> time perl perltest.pl
> ..................................................
> real    0m4.312s
> user    0m4.272s
> sys     0m0.036s
 
As does CentOS 5.2 64-bit and perl 5.8.8:

# time perl perltest.pl
..................................................
real    0m5.873s
user    0m4.976s
sys     0m0.021s

Cheers,

Phil
-- 
Phil Randal
Networks Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK

RE: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by Jason Bertoch <ja...@electronet.net>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:rickm@ummm-beer.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:03 AM
> To: Justin Mason
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?
> 
> I can verify that CentOS release 4.6 (Final) with  perl, v5.8.5 built
> for i386-linux-thread-multi is NOT affected.
> 
> time perl perlbug.pl
> ..................................................
> real    0m0.219s
> user    0m0.201s
> sys     0m0.015s
> 
> 

CentOS 5.2 64-bit and perl 5.10.0 rum without problems:

# time perl perltest.pl 
..................................................
real    0m0.120s
user    0m0.096s
sys     0m0.012s


However, Centos 5.2 32-bit and perl 5.8.8 chokes:

time perl perltest.pl     
..................................................
real    0m4.312s
user    0m4.272s
sys     0m0.036s


Jason A. Bertoch
Network Administrator
jason@electronet.net
Electronet Broadband Communications
3411 Capital Medical Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32308
(V) 850.222.0229 (F) 850.222.8771



Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by Rick Macdougall <ri...@ummm-beer.com>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> have you seen this?
> 
>   http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
> 
> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down SpamAssassin,
> too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
> 
> --j.

I can verify that CentOS release 4.6 (Final) with  perl, v5.8.5 built 
for i386-linux-thread-multi is NOT affected.

time perl perlbug.pl
..................................................
real    0m0.219s
user    0m0.201s
sys     0m0.015s


Regards,

Rick


Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by Richard Frovarp <ri...@sendit.nodak.edu>.
Justin Mason wrote:
> have you seen this?
>
>   http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
>
> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down SpamAssassin,
> too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
>
> --j.
>
>   
I don't notice any difference between my RHEL 4 (not affected) and my 
RHEL 5 (affected) installs. I am running SA through MailScanner, so I 
may not be using parts that would be affected. However, if the counts 
are small enough, the time differential is so small it would not be 
noticeable to me on our relatively busy boxes. That being said, if you 
change that 50,000 in the test loop to 500,000, it then spikes to 40 
minutes for the first half of the loop (at which point I gave up), 
instead of 4 seconds for 50,000. It does seem to exponentially slow down 
as the number of blesses called goes up.


Re: using RHEL / CentOS / Fedora perl?

Posted by dnk <d....@gmail.com>.
On 8-Sep-08, at 6:38 AM, Justin Mason wrote:

> have you seen this?
>
>  http://blog.vipul.net/2008/08/24/redhat-perl-what-a-tragedy/
>
> That bug in Red Hat perl will almost definitely slow down  
> SpamAssassin,
> too, I would say.  Can anyone verify?
>
> --j.

I know as far as centos goes, there are some patches out already by  
Karanbir Singh.

http://www.karan.org/blog/