-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Matt Kettler wrote: > 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"?
As long as I can see from top evolution calls spamassassin and not spamc :-(. I also have seen something like "spamd child". What is that? > > 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". I can do nothing about that, what a pity > 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. Spamd is loaded at startup. If evolution calls spamassassin there is no point loading spamd at startup right? > Also, if you are using spamd you *must* restart it every time you make > config changes other than user_prefs. I always restart when changing something in the settings files. > > 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. I see.... Thanks for your time! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iE8DBQFHQBAK+JjGoasQ6NIRCALqAN4otby3iYTNI2wRsEVxoySLOVWfa47tVWv8 yxKEAN9HvgP6qh2wJArs2bWT3IZZq3VcHh4t2NUju2kH =+L0q -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
