On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Dan Christensen wrote:
> Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, George Georgalis wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 06:44:35PM +0200, LeVA wrote:
>>>
>>>>So when I'm getting a large amount of messages there is approx.
>>>>15-20 spamc/spamd running. I want to limit this to ~5.
>>>
>>> I suspect if spamc invokes spamd but spamd reached its max-children
>>> then spamc will act as if spamd timed out, or report ham.
>>
>> That depends on the options you pass to spamc; I pass -x which says
>> "report a temp failure in that case", and advise that for general
>> use.
>
> I'm not sure if this is helpful to the original poster, but I invoke
> spamc from within procmail, and use a lockfile to limit it to one
> invocation at a time.
>
> Does anyone see a problem with this setup? (I use exim as my MTA.)
No, no problem. This is a pretty high overhead solution, though, and
the original question was about limiting that overhead. :)
Daniel
--
99 dreams I have had / In every one a red balloon
It's all over and I'm standing pretty / In this dust that was a city
If I could find a souvenir / Just to prove the world was here
-- Nina, _99 Red Balloons_
