Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
Noiano wrote: > > > Spamd is loaded at startup. If evolution calls spamassassin there is > no point loading spamd at startup right? Correct. If evolution is calling SpamAssassin using the "spamassassin" command line script, then spamd won't be used. Use of spamd is the defining difference between the "spamassassin" and "spamc" command-line tools.
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Matt Kettler wrote: > Noiano wrote: >> McDonald, Dan wrote: >>> Ah, I gave you the syntax backwards. Should be: >>> priority SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST -500 > > Odds are that change is irrelevant. In SA 3.2.3 at least, the > SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST is already configured with priority -900 and > shortcircuiting enabled, provided the Shortcircuit (not loaded by > default) and WhiteListSubject (loaded by default) plugins are loaded. > >> Now it works but it doesn't seem to speed up the analysis process. >> It takes all most a second to analyze a message that meets the >> subject rule. Is there anything else that needs to be done? > Is your evolution calling "spamassassin" or is it calling "spamc"? As long as I can see from top evolution calls spamassassin and not spamc :-(. I also have seen something like "spamd child". What is that? > > If it's calling "spamassassin", well, that's going to create a new > spamassassin instance for every message, and is going to be slow and > expensive to start up. Shortcircuiting can't bypass the overhead of > calling SA, which is probably where most of your time is spent when > using "spamassassin". I can do nothing about that, what a pity > You could switch to spamc, but this requires that you keep spamd running > on your system. That means that there will always be at least one > spamassassin instance loaded in memory (and thus occupying memory) at > all times. This makes scanning messages *MUCH* faster, but if you're not > running a lot of email, it wastes memory. Spamd is loaded at startup. If evolution calls spamassassin there is no point loading spamd at startup right? > Also, if you are using spamd you *must* restart it every time you make > config changes other than user_prefs. I always restart when changing something in the settings files. > > On my test box, spamd takes up 60mb of memory. > > Without a blacklist_subject: > -- > $ time spamassassin > real0m5.832s > > $ time spamc > real0m1.134s > > Note the really big difference in time. > > With a blacklist_subject and shortcircuiting enabled: > -- > $ time spamassassin > real0m2.198s > > $ time spamc > real0m0.123s > > Note that both got faster, but the plain spamassassin is still slower > than spamc is even when spamc isn't shortcircuiting the message. I see Thanks for your time! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iE8DBQFHQBAK+JjGoasQ6NIRCALqAN4otby3iYTNI2wRsEVxoySLOVWfa47tVWv8 yxKEAN9HvgP6qh2wJArs2bWT3IZZq3VcHh4t2NUju2kH =+L0q -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
Noiano wrote: > McDonald, Dan wrote: > > Ah, I gave you the syntax backwards. Should be: > > priority SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST -500 Odds are that change is irrelevant. In SA 3.2.3 at least, the SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST is already configured with priority -900 and shortcircuiting enabled, provided the Shortcircuit (not loaded by default) and WhiteListSubject (loaded by default) plugins are loaded. > > Now it works but it doesn't seem to speed up the analysis process. > It takes all most a second to analyze a message that meets the > subject rule. Is there anything else that needs to be done? Is your evolution calling "spamassassin" or is it calling "spamc"? If it's calling "spamassassin", well, that's going to create a new spamassassin instance for every message, and is going to be slow and expensive to start up. Shortcircuiting can't bypass the overhead of calling SA, which is probably where most of your time is spent when using "spamassassin". You could switch to spamc, but this requires that you keep spamd running on your system. That means that there will always be at least one spamassassin instance loaded in memory (and thus occupying memory) at all times. This makes scanning messages *MUCH* faster, but if you're not running a lot of email, it wastes memory. Also, if you are using spamd you *must* restart it every time you make config changes other than user_prefs. On my test box, spamd takes up 60mb of memory. Without a blacklist_subject: -- $ time spamassassin real0m5.832s $ time spamc real0m1.134s Note the really big difference in time. With a blacklist_subject and shortcircuiting enabled: -- $ time spamassassin real0m2.198s $ time spamc real0m0.123s Note that both got faster, but the plain spamassassin is still slower than spamc is even when spamc isn't shortcircuiting the message.
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 McDonald, Dan wrote: > Ah, I gave you the syntax backwards. Should be: > priority SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST -500 > Now it works but it doesn't seem to speed up the analysis process. It takes all most a second to analyze a message that meets the subject rule. Is there anything else that needs to be done? Thanks Noiano -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iE8DBQFHPvRw+JjGoasQ6NIRCJPMAOCaX4KhDJg/wZjKkB83sngr2R7tRwkrmSTB C25eAN4lLUirhdpn3I7kyqDS7qHS8PFKdlRB00i0jhFo =awN/ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 12:23 +0100, Noiano wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > McDonald, Dan wrote: > > in local.cf > > > > ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit > > > > priority -500 SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST > > shortcircuit SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST spam > > > > endif > > > I get this message when I restart spamassassin: > > Restarting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: [6636] warn: Argument > "SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST" isn't numeric in numeric comparison (<=>) at > /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm line 825. > spamd. > Ah, I gave you the syntax backwards. Should be: priority SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST -500 -- Daniel J McDonald, CCIE #2495, CISSP #78281, CNX Austin Energy http://www.austinenergy.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 McDonald, Dan wrote: > in whatever.pre: > > loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit Done, I have put that line into init.pre > > > in local.cf > > ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit > > priority -500 SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST > shortcircuit SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST spam > > endif > I get this message when I restart spamassassin: Restarting SpamAssassin Mail Filter Daemon: [6636] warn: Argument "SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST" isn't numeric in numeric comparison (<=>) at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm line 825. spamd. I also have blacklist_subject [Suspected Spam] in local.cf -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iE8DBQFHPs9O+JjGoasQ6NIRCCCiAOCa6bs6qDyASBnLDNIlUwm3Q8EQPVSxxy/s DjmKANoDEFWyZZXEIkyepwnMQLyXj6Q7Tg7vOODg6sBH =mc6e -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 mouss wrote: > The best approach is to not pass such messages to SA. How to do this > depends on how you call SA. > I cannot do that as SA is called through evolution mail. Thanks Noiano PS: I post to this list using gmane. Is it possible to stop delivery on my email address so that I can post but I do not receive the list messages? -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iE8DBQFHPs+8+JjGoasQ6NIRCB2BANkBt7xN7na5Fyd9/EkgizOn204EqhIEolFs oBKBAOCBLMHpTWaCGw6RB7EzwwGQYg6Mz0QLC/iR1cgD =4yR0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 18:37 +0100, Noiano wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hello folks > I have a little problem. My email provider has a spam filter which > marks all spam email with "[Suspected Spam]" in the subject of the > spam message. Now I would like that SpamAssassin when finds that > pattern in the subject immediately breaks any analysis and mark the > email as spam without performing any time consuming calculations. It > seems to me a waste of time to re-analyze spam email already > categorized as spam. So I joined the #SpamAssassin channel on > freenode and someone told me to add: > > blacklist_subject [Suspected Spam] > > but the analysis is still performed. So he told me to look at the > shortcircuit plugin. I looked at this page > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_Shortcircuit.html > but I didn't understand what to write in my local.cf in order to > achieve my aims. > > Can anyone help? in whatever.pre: loadplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit in local.cf ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Shortcircuit priority -500 SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST shortcircuit SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST spam endif -- Daniel J McDonald, CCIE #2495, CISSP #78281, CNX Austin Energy http://www.austinenergy.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: How to avoid spam analysis when unnecessary
Noiano wrote: > Hello folks > I have a little problem. My email provider has a spam filter which > marks all spam email with "[Suspected Spam]" in the subject of the > spam message. Now I would like that SpamAssassin when finds that > pattern in the subject immediately breaks any analysis and mark the > email as spam without performing any time consuming calculations. It > seems to me a waste of time to re-analyze spam email already > categorized as spam. So I joined the #SpamAssassin channel on > freenode and someone told me to add: > The best approach is to not pass such messages to SA. How to do this depends on how you call SA. > blacklist_subject [Suspected Spam] > > but the analysis is still performed. So he told me to look at the > shortcircuit plugin. I looked at this page > http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_Shortcircuit.html > but I didn't understand what to write in my local.cf in order to > achieve my aims. > > Can anyone help?