Chris a écrit : > While I agree with most of what you outlined (I too experiance tons of > issues with the nes SA/Amavisd combo) - My mailsystem won't work (at > least I don't think so) under this config.
unless you can measure and check what causes the real problems, ther's no point in trying to devise a theory on that. trading a perl based daemon (amavisd-new) for a shell script that is forked not only for every message, but for every recipient can hardly be justified. If the previous message was sent to the squid guys, I don't promiss they'll keep the sender alife... > > Mainly - it's a mailsever that is a relay for an exchange server. That > means, there isnt any local users. so to me the injection of procmail > etc, would be needlessly wasting time to implement. > > Even with a gig a ram, I need to trim back the amount of rules I use. In > addition, I alwasy though the idea of a second smtp engine (as in > Amavis) is silly. > > I considered Mailscanner, I like the idea of NOT introducing another > smtp engine however, I don't like the idea of HOLDing the mail either. > The issue isn't the number of tcp connections. It's about what each does. The real issue when using SA is that you are doing a lot of regex matching. and this will still be here, whether you write this in a C daemon or in script. > And as of late, Amaivs has been more like deailing with a 4 year old in > a toy store. > > So for now, I'm still looking and open to ideas. > use another filter? I personally focus on getting less FPs while catching most spam, than trying to get my mail faster.
