Thomas.Meyer said: > On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Jack Gostl wrote: > > > On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > > > > > Jack Gostl wrote on Mon, 16 Jun 2003 00:33:10 -0400 (EDT): > > > > > > > Using Pine, I checked the message ID and scanned the syslog > > > > (which includes both spamd and sendmail entries) and located the > > > > message being handed off to procmail. It wasn't even slightly > > > > busy at that time. > > > > > > > > > > The machine doesn't need to be busy. Did you check the log, so > > > that you know how long the processing took? > > > > Its tough to match up, but there is an entry that shows 303 seconds > > to process a message. What would make it take that long for such a > > short message? > > we are observing similar problems at our installation: a percentage of > about 20-30 percent of all messages run through Spamassassin 2.55 are > missing the X-Spam headers, although logfiles look fine. > > On another machine running 2.53, we don't see that problem: could it be > a bug in this current version?
times to process of over 30 seconds almost always indicates network tests are having trouble. Eventually spamc will time out and not tag the mails. Set up a DNS caching nameserver; run "spamassassin -D -t < sample-spam.txt" and see what lookup is taking so long. It's probably DNS or Razor. --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: eBay Great deals on office technology -- on eBay now! Click here: http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/711-11697-6916-5 _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
