Noiano wrote: > McDonald, Dan wrote: > > Ah, I gave you the syntax backwards. Should be: > > priority SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST -500
Odds are that change is irrelevant. In SA 3.2.3 at least, the SUBJECT_IN_BLACKLIST is already configured with priority -900 and shortcircuiting enabled, provided the Shortcircuit (not loaded by default) and WhiteListSubject (loaded by default) plugins are loaded. > > Now it works but it doesn't seem to speed up the analysis process. > It takes all most a second to analyze a message that meets the > subject rule. Is there anything else that needs to be done? Is your evolution calling "spamassassin" or is it calling "spamc"? If it's calling "spamassassin", well, that's going to create a new spamassassin instance for every message, and is going to be slow and expensive to start up. Shortcircuiting can't bypass the overhead of calling SA, which is probably where most of your time is spent when using "spamassassin". You could switch to spamc, but this requires that you keep spamd running on your system. That means that there will always be at least one spamassassin instance loaded in memory (and thus occupying memory) at all times. This makes scanning messages *MUCH* faster, but if you're not running a lot of email, it wastes memory. Also, if you are using spamd you *must* restart it every time you make config changes other than user_prefs. On my test box, spamd takes up 60mb of memory. Without a blacklist_subject: -------------------------- $ time spamassassin <sample-spam.txt <snip> real 0m5.832s $ time spamc <sample-spam.txt <snip> real 0m1.134s Note the really big difference in time. With a blacklist_subject and shortcircuiting enabled: -------------------------- $ time spamassassin <sample-spam.txt <snip> real 0m2.198s $ time spamc <sample-spam.txt <snip> real 0m0.123s Note that both got faster, but the plain spamassassin is still slower than spamc is even when spamc isn't shortcircuiting the message.
