You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by George <gm...@captainnet.net> on 2005/12/08 18:04:13 UTC
Resource temporarily unavailable on spamd socket
Hello list,
I've seen some posting relating to my problem, but I haven't seen any
resolution posted back to this list.
I'm using SA 3.10 wih Exim 4.60 on Darwin and I'm getting the
following in Exim panic log:
2005-12-08 07:18:50 IR6QJD-00008X-PB spam acl condition: Resource
temporarily unavailable on spamd socket
I get this message 40 to 50 times per day on a low volume server.
(maybe 1000/day volume)
The corresponding reference in my mail log that is used by imap pop
and spamd shows the following:
Dec 8 07:18:50 dnsbureau spamd[281]: spamd: bad protocol: header
error: (Content-Length mismatch: Expected 9274 bytes, got 8123 bytes)
at /usr/bin/spamd line 1674, <GEN16> line 161.\n
The particular email does not have an attachement, so that could not
be a real issue. I'm using Unix sockets as it seems more stable to me
than an IP. Also, it does happen sometimes, when no other processess
are running.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
George
Re: Resource temporarily unavailable on spamd socket
Posted by Jim Maul <jm...@elih.org>.
George wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I've seen some posting relating to my problem, but I haven't seen any
> resolution posted back to this list.
> I'm using SA 3.10 wih Exim 4.60 on Darwin and I'm getting the following
> in Exim panic log:
>
> 2005-12-08 07:18:50 IR6QJD-00008X-PB spam acl condition: Resource
> temporarily unavailable on spamd socket
>
> I get this message 40 to 50 times per day on a low volume server. (maybe
> 1000/day volume)
>
> The corresponding reference in my mail log that is used by imap pop and
> spamd shows the following:
>
> Dec 8 07:18:50 dnsbureau spamd[281]: spamd: bad protocol: header error:
> (Content-Length mismatch: Expected 9274 bytes, got 8123 bytes) at
> /usr/bin/spamd line 1674, <GEN16> line 161.\n
>
> The particular email does not have an attachement, so that could not be
> a real issue. I'm using Unix sockets as it seems more stable to me than
> an IP. Also, it does happen sometimes, when no other processess are
> running.
>
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> George
>
>
wasnt there a bug report on this? I seem to remember seeing something
on the list about it. I remember the "Expected 9274 bytes, got 8123
bytes" part. A quick search on bugzilla didnt really find anything
relevant but you might want to check it out.
-Jim