Matt Kettler wrote on Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:43:01 -0400:
> Chris S reported his spamd swelling to 45mb with a huge version of
> bigevil.cf he was testing.
>
The latest bigevil.cf needs about 40 - 50 MB *alone*! Together with
several SARE rules our spamd processes were around 90 MB lately. That's
Hello Chr.,
Friday, September 17, 2004, 7:58:11 AM, Stucki (Christoph von Stuckrad)
wrote:
CvS> On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:42:20AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
>> Since your box has 256mb of physical ram, I'd limit it to maximum of
>> 256mb/15mb = 17 spamd's at the highest. I'd really suggest usi
-Original Message-
From: Robert Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:12 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Memory usage question
-Original Message-
From: Brook Humphrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10
-Original Message-
From: Brook Humphrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:04 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Memory usage question
On Friday 17 September 2004 07:05, Chris Santerre wrote:
> Yeah, bring that 50 down a little :) Maybe 10. M
On Friday 17 September 2004 07:05, Chris Santerre wrote:
> Yeah, bring that 50 down a little :) Maybe 10. More memory NEVER hurt
> anyone!
>
> Currently with BigEvil I'm running 51 megs for spamd!!! But the record on a
> production server is something like 145. I think it was a crazy german ;)
>
>
On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:42:20AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote:
> Since your box has 256mb of physical ram, I'd limit it to maximum of
> 256mb/15mb = 17 spamd's at the highest. I'd really suggest using something
> much lower like 10 unless you add some ram.
Even this seems to be dangerous (sometim
At 09:23 AM 9/17/2004, Robert Bartlett wrote:
Are you using the -m parameter of spamd to limit the number of children
it
will spawn? I'd suggest something like -m 6 to start with.
Yeah it is setup for 50:
-d -c -a -m50 -u user -v -H
50 is a LOT of spamd's... even at the low-end of 15mb each that's
>-Original Message-
>From: Robert Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 9:24 AM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: RE: Memory usage question
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 6:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Memory usage question
At 06:56 PM 9/16/2004 -0700, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>Thanks for the reply! Here is the deal,
At 06:56 PM 9/16/2004 -0700, Robert Bartlett wrote:
Thanks for the reply! Here is the deal, we are currently deciding what
we want to do next. Currently we have a Celeron 2.4 gig system with 256
megs of ram and a 40 gig hdd. In the past week or so our system has come
to a halt, under 3 megs availab
> Thanks for the reply! Here is the deal, we are currently deciding what
> we want to do next. Currently we have a Celeron 2.4 gig system with 256
> megs of ram and a 40 gig hdd. In the past week or so our system has come
> to a halt, under 3 megs available, due to a bunch of emails coming in at
>
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 6:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Memory usage question
At 09:26 PM 9/16/2004, Robert Bartlett wrote:
>I remember someone saying something ab
At 09:26 PM 9/16/2004, Robert Bartlett wrote:
I remember someone saying something about memory usage per email that
spamd uses to scan? But cannot find the email, what is the estimated
amount of memory used per SA scan? I also have clamav set up
Varies a lot depending on your configuration (bayes
I remember someone saying something about memory usage per
email that spamd uses to scan? But cannot find the
email, what is the estimated amount of memory used per SA scan? I also have clamav set up.
Thank you
Robert Bartlett
Director of Software Engineering
Digital Phoenix Hosting & D
14 matches
Mail list logo
