Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
I am running SpamAssassin 3.1.7 on a Sunfire V210 with Solaris 10. SA is called from Exim via the sa-exim localscan patch. Nothing has changed since I last upgraded Exim at the beginning of November. Over the past couple of days, I have been seeing the following messages in my logs from time to ti

Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
I have found the related Exim message... 2006-12-19 11:47:02 1GwdM9-0006Pd-35 local_scan() function timed out - message temporarily rejected (size 320896) ... so maybe I've posted this to the wrong list. Sorry. Jon

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Sietse van Zanen
't hurt to post the same question to the exim mailing list. -Sietse From: Jon Armitage Sent: Tue 19-Dec-06 14:32 To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Intermittent spamc error I have found the related Exim message... 2006-12-19 11:47:02 1GwdM9-0006Pd-35 local_scan() function time

Re: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Ribbens
Sietse van Zanen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have found the related Exim message... > > > > 2006-12-19 11:47:02 1GwdM9-0006Pd-35 local_scan() function timed out - > > message temporarily rejected (size 320896) > > > ... so maybe I've posted this to the wrong list. Sorry. > >Unfortuna

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
> From: Sietse van Zanen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 19 December 2006 14:54 > Subject: RE: Intermittent spamc error > Don't think that that is a problem SA, because on my sendmail set-up it works perfectly. Maybe a bug in the local_scan() > function? Thanks, Sietse, I

RE: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Armitage
> -Original Message- > From: Jon Ribbens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I solved the problem by simply making my filter not bother passing the > message to spamc at all if it was over 200k. > Yes, as I understand sa-exim, messages over 250K (the default in my case) should not be passed t

Re: Intermittent spamc error

2006-12-19 Thread Jon Ribbens
Jon Armitage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I solved the problem by simply making my filter not bother passing the > > message to spamc at all if it was over 200k. > > Yes, as I understand sa-exim, messages over 250K (the default in my case) > should not be passed to SA. That's why I'm wondering w