> My Dl360 with dual 1.266ghz CPU's, 2GB of RAM, and dual 18GB mirrored scsi
> drives can only scan a message in 4-5 seconds. At least that was my scan
> time with a completely default setup, running spamd/spamass-milter, SA
> 3.0.1, RedHat FC2, and sendmail 8.13.1. I haven't checked in a while
From: "Jon Dossey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: Menno van Bennekom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: David Velásquez Restrepo
> Subject: Re: Simple question TRUE or FALSE (More data to answer this
> question)
>
> > Q) With spamassassin (and all the above info) yo
>> I have a mailserver here that has a 1Ghz CPU and 512MB RAM and SA on that
>> server usually takes 2 or 3 seconds per message.
>> Like already posted, some of your rulesets are unnecessary because they
>> are included in SA (standard rulesets or SURBL).
>> Did you check 'cat messages | spamassass
Jon Dossey wrote:
>
> Please don't take this as me doubting you - but how in the world are you able
> to scan a message in 2-3 seconds? I assume you're running some of the
> network tests, like other people that have posted 2-3 second message
> processing times, is that correct?
>
> My Dl360
Jon Dossey wrote:
> Please don't take this as me doubting you - but how in the world are
> you able to scan a message in 2-3 seconds? I assume you're running
> some of the network tests, like other people that have posted 2-3
> second message processing times, is that correct?
>
> My Dl360 with
On Thu, 19 May 2005 16:33:36 -0500
"Jon Dossey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Menno van Bennekom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: David Velásquez Restrepo
> > Subject: Re: Simple question TRUE or FALSE (More data to answer
> > this question)
>
Justin Mason wrote:
>
> jdow writes:
>
>>>You are using larger chunks of VIRT than I am. I use about 60M where
>>>you are using 98M. I run with "--max-conn-per-child=15". You win a
>>>little if you either add RAM or cut down to "-m2" or "-m3". You do
>>>have a fair amount of cache in use. Once th
> Please don't take this as me doubting you - but how in the world are you
> able to scan a message in 2-3 seconds? I assume you're running some of
Personally, I rarely have any processing times over 1 second. Most
of mine are between 0.3 and 0.9 seconds per message.
I do not run any network t
> Software:
> --
> A perl script wich takes some file and test it using Mail::SpamAssassin to
Which version of SA?
> Using: Net test, Bayes, Razor2, DCC, Phyzor, SPF Test (and everything else
> suggested by spamassassin)
> Rules:
>
> From: Menno van Bennekom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: David Velásquez Restrepo
> Subject: Re: Simple question TRUE or FALSE (More data to answer this
> question)
>
> > Q) With spamassassin (and all the above info) you need about 20 to 30
> > seconds per email mess
> > Q) With spamassassin (and all the above info) you need
> about 20 to 30
> > seconds per email message and LOTS of RAM and CPU:
> > a) TRUE
> > b) FALSE
> My answer is b), False.
> I have a mailserver here that has a 1Ghz CPU and 512MB RAM
> and SA on that server usually takes 2 or
David Velásquez Restrepo wrote:
> Software:
> --
> A perl script wich takes some file and test it using Mail::SpamAssassin
> to get it´s spam score level
If your script isn't persistent, I'd ditch it and use spamc/spamd as Justin
Mason su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
jdow writes:
> You are using larger chunks of VIRT than I am. I use about 60M where
> you are using 98M. I run with "--max-conn-per-child=15". You win a
> little if you either add RAM or cut down to "-m2" or "-m3". You do
> have a fair amount of cache
> Q) With spamassassin (and all the above info) you need about 20 to 30
> seconds per email message and LOTS of RAM and CPU:
> a) TRUE
> b) FALSE
My answer is b), False.
I have a mailserver here that has a 1Ghz CPU and 512MB RAM and SA on that
server usually takes 2 or 3 seconds per message
From: "David Velásquez Restrepo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Software:
> --
> A perl script wich takes some file and test it using Mail::SpamAssassin to
> get it´s spam score level
> OS: gentoo 2005.0
> MTA: postfix
>
> SpamAssassin:
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
use spamd.
- --j.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQFCjBz0MJF5cimLx9ARArJbAKCzDKjKCODdwTWx+OBBCp6lY7B9rgCdEo7C
+IGtZtyPQpOgYxB22dSrQIg=
=KUEV
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Hi David,
A few quick tips to help performance...
David Velásquez Restrepo said:
SNIP
> http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules/bigevil.cf
Do not, I repeat do not use this file, it grew way to big. This type of test is
better handled by SURBL.
> http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mkettler
Software:
--
A perl script wich takes some file and test it using Mail::SpamAssassin to
get it´s spam score level
OS: gentoo 2005.0
MTA: postfix
SpamAssassin:
--
Using: Net test
18 matches
Mail list logo
