On Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Mike Saunders said:
> Every time you load spamassassin you have to load the entire perl
> interpreter and it's environment. It has to scan it's library pathis (I
> believe...) and you may have more in place now. That takes time. Plus
> you're running a lot of other processes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Mike Loiterman wrote:
>
>
> I normally use spamd, and its performance seems fine, but I recently
> had a reasons to fire-up spamassassin. It seems unusually slow to do
>just about anything..even to do a "spamassassin -V". Definition of slow:
>about 20 seconds to just to a '
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I normally use spamd, and its performance seems fine, but I recently had a reasons to
fire-up spamassassin. It seems unusually slow to do just about anything..even to do a
"spamassassin -V". Definition of slow: about 20 seconds to just to a ' -V'
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:54:35AM -0500, hou, ming wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am running Spamassassin 2.43 with Perl 5.80 on Sun UltraSparc 500 MHz
> machine.
>
> I have tested with 500 concurrent e-mails sent to Sendmail through
> Spam-milter
> v1.2 to spamc, spamd, and Spamassassin(these processes we
Hi,
I am running Spamassassin 2.43 with Perl 5.80 on Sun UltraSparc 500 MHz
machine.
I have tested with 500 concurrent e-mails sent to Sendmail through
Spam-milter
v1.2 to spamc, spamd, and Spamassassin(these processes were running at the
same machine). I found that number of e-mails not able t
