On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Jeff Chan muttered drunkenly:
On Wednesday, December 1, 2004, 8:17:14 AM, Ronan Ronan wrote:
how do i check whether SA is using
the locally stored file or whether is still querying the surbl.org DNS?
Is there an easy way if your not a bind / DNS guru?
A dig may tell
Ronan wrote:
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank
cheque by my boss to buy 2 new servers for SA. They were so impressed
with the upgrade to v3 + SURIBLS et al that when i said that our
current setup was hitting load max they found some cash for me... :D
We
Rick Beebe wrote:
Ronan wrote:
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank
cheque by my boss to buy 2 new servers for SA. They were so
impressed with the upgrade to v3 + SURIBLS et al that when i said
that our current setup was hitting load max they found some
Ronan wrote:
snip
Ok well I hounded or DNS guys to finally put multi.surbls.org into the
dns(as a master), watched him HUP named and then
should i notice a difference??
im still getting 10+ seconds scantime on some messages..
how do i tell if its working?
message size issues???
if you can
Martin Hepworth wrote:
Ronan wrote:
snip
Ok well I hounded or DNS guys to finally put multi.surbls.org into the
dns(as a master), watched him HUP named and then
should i notice a difference??
im still getting 10+ seconds scantime on some messages..
how do i tell if its working?
well granted
On Wednesday, December 1, 2004, 8:17:14 AM, Ronan Ronan wrote:
how do i check whether SA is using
the locally stored file or whether is still querying the surbl.org DNS?
Is there an easy way if your not a bind / DNS guru?
A dig may tell what name server it thinks it's using.
Jeff C.
--
Jeff
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank cheque by my
boss to buy 2 new servers for SA. They were so impressed with the
upgrade to v3 + SURIBLS et al that when i said that our current setup
was hitting load max they found some cash for me... :D
We are in a
On Tuesday, November 30, 2004, 4:28:35 AM, Ronan Ronan wrote:
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank cheque by
my
boss to buy 2 new servers for SA. They were so impressed with the
upgrade to v3 + SURIBLS et al that when i said that our current setup
Ronan
I'd go for dual opteron V20z if you want to stick with sun kit.
Will outperform the Sparc based stuff.
no need to heart-beat, just have the two machines on same MX value and
DNS will load balance for you.
Would be interesting to see how Solaris 10 compares with Linux in this
environment -
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, November 30, 2004, 4:28:35 AM, Ronan Ronan wrote:
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank cheque by my
boss to buy 2 new servers for SA. They were so impressed with the
upgrade to v3 + SURIBLS et al that when i said that our current
You might also look at Solaris X86. I've just brought up such a box,
and am impressed with the performance relative to Linux on the same box.
jay
Jeff Chan wrote:
On Tuesday, November 30, 2004, 4:28:35 AM, Ronan Ronan wrote:
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given
of the nodes for maintenance without any customer impact
at all.
Gary
-Original Message-
From: Ronan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 4:29 AM
To: spam
Subject: New Hardware
Hey list,
I am in the quite sureal situation of being given a blank cheque
Ronan wrote:
Which one will be better suited to SA? I know SA is more cpu/ram than
disk IO so im leaning more toward the AMD approach. The reason there are
2 machines of each is because im gonna implement fail over using
heartbeat.
Depending on your setup, you can probably do without
Subject: RE: New Hardware
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:42:02 -0800
From: Gary W. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ronan [EMAIL PROTECTED], spam users@spamassassin.apache.org
We use 4 single processor machines 2.8ghz P4 HT and we are doing
150k per day now without breaking a sweat. We also have two
14 matches
Mail list logo
