Moin, * Stelios Bounanos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-05-10 22:29]: > >>>>> On Fri, 10 May 2002 08:53:29 -0700, Christian G Warden > >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was runoured to have said: > > > On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 01:04:40PM +0300, Jussi Ekholm wrote: > >> Christian G. Warden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> (Could you please post your reply *below* the quoted text? Top-posting > >> is quite irritating, IMHO) > >> > >> > i just want to add a warning about spamassassin. i had it setup for > >> > about a week and it was very good at catching spam, but occasionally it > >> > would drive the cpu load into the 20s. > >> > >> Yes, I can say this, as well. My computer swapped twice (so much, that I > >> had to hit MSysRq and boot) because of SA started to investigate pretty > >> big binary mails. Although, "fixing" the problem is pretty easy; just > >> add 'required_hits = x' in ~/.spamassassin/user_prefs, where 'x' is > >> maybe 5 or something else. This makes SA to stop processing mails > >> further than hits you just specified. > > > i tend to prefer top-posting except when responding point by point > > between paragraphs. admittedly, it's lazy and encourages excessive > > quoting, but this just feels awkward. i'll try it out for a few days. > > maybe it'll grow on me. > > thanks for the required_hits tip. next time i try SA, i'll read through > > the docs more thoroughly. > >You can also run SA in a "client-server" mode. Basically your procmail >recipe uses spamc to connect to a spamd daemon that does the checking. >There's a discussion in the SA docs on why this more efficient; it >solved the high system load problem for me...
I agree. I even made up a small page so that I just can refer to it instead of explaining the problem every time. Thorsten -- Guns don't protect freedom, people protect freedom. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
