I run qmail/H+Bev AV/SpamAssassin with
backhair.cf
bigevil.cf
chickenpox.cf
popcorn.cf
weeds.cf
plus a couple custom cf files, totaling about 70 rules
I average about +70K messages a day with 66% being spam
Using a Dual Athlon 2200MPX w/512MB RAM. The load stays around
I run a P733 with 384MB RAM with Red Hat 7.3. Use
Postfix/Procmail/html-trap (Hardin's Sanitizer)/SpamAssassin combination.
Use DCC, DNSBLs, BigEvil/NovRules/OctRules, Jennifer's
Popcorn/Backhair/Weeds/Cpox, and Bayes with SA. The box is relay only. No
local mail.
I also keep a copy of all head
We run a small corporate-gateway install:
P-III 733 MHz with 256 MB, running:
RedHat 7.3 / sendmail / MailScanner / F-prot AV / SpamAssassin with BigEvil and ~100
local rules
This easily keeps up with 10,000 messages per day. We use MTA-level blocking of dead
recipient addresses which eliminat
t there is a Postfix upgrade
that will allow better integration there, but I'm not following the Postfix
list that close. Too much volume.
<>
| -Original Message-
| From: Bob Apthorpe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:27 AM
| To: SATalk
> A couple questions: Do you reject connections at the MTA level with
> DNSBLs? What fraction of the mail you accept is spam? If you're still
> seeing a substantial amount of spam leaking past the DNSBLs, you might
> consider greylisting (aka "tempfailing"; see
> http://projects.puremagic.com/greyl
Hi,
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Jeff Koch wrote:
> We run SA 2.55, qmail-mail scanner (with F-Secure) and vpopmail on a 2.4Ghz
> P4 Dell Server with 1GB RAM and 120GB 10K ATA drive. Last week the server
> virus/spam filtered and popped 423,325 messages. During the last 2.5 days
> the server's handled 37
We run SA 2.55, qmail-mail scanner (with F-Secure) and vpopmail on a 2.4Ghz
P4 Dell Server with 1GB RAM and 120GB 10K ATA drive. Last week the server
virus/spam filtered and popped 423,325 messages. During the last 2.5 days
the server's handled 376,168 messages. The machine is smoken - looks lik
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 11:38:39AM -0500, Andy Donovan wrote:
> Could I ask a quick poll on the # of messages your configuration is able
to process per minute .. its time for me to move platforms and I'm trying
to plan for growth . your comments would be extremely useful.
We run SA 2.6.1 on 4
Andy Donovan wrote:
> Could I ask a quick poll on the # of messages your configuration is
> able to process per minute .. its time for me to move platforms and
> I'm trying to plan for growth . your comments would be extremely
> useful.
PII/450/512M, running sendmail+MIMEDefang+clamav+SA. Run
I am running SA on a PIII 450 with 384 MB of RAM and it processes about 5k to 6k of messages (92% spam) a day without ever hitting swap.
--Mike
From: Andy DonovanSent: Mon 1/12/2004 10:38 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [SAtalk] SA Performance ...
Could I ask a quick poll on the # of mes
Well, we _were_ running SA on a single P-III 733 with 256Mb ram and
processing an average of 15k messages/day, but about once/week the
system would fold up under it's own weight. It would basically run out
of RAM and die...
When we were only processing about 10-12k messages/day, things were
pretty
It took me awhile to get it right, but I finally did yesterday;^)
I'm running FreeBSD 4.7, Postfix, Procmail, SA2.61, on Perl 5.8 and had a bear
of a time getting the processes on my 1.8Ghz 1GB ram, IBM SCSI drives with
each partition required by an email server;^) At times my process would go
The virus scanning mail servers that are in front of this box are
doing RBL and MX checks and tagging messages with X headers. I then
have a couple custom scores in the spamassassin config for these
headers. This was done prior to spamassassin for use with some custom
procmail spam filtering, and
One thing I always do on my MTAs that use DNSBls is only use zone
transfers of blacklists on my DNS server. I currently use 7 DNSBls from
Sendmail, only 2 commercial lists. That brings the total DNS queries for
each message to around 10. Now I don't deal with tons of mail per day,
compared to s
Did you even try to have a huge ass dns caching server on available, or
just not even looking for these features?
On Tue, 2002-10-15 at 16:19, Steven Saner wrote:
> I use a dual P-III 1GHz, 1GB RAM. I churn as many as 80,000 messages a
> day through spamassassin using spamc/spamd called from pr
I use a dual P-III 1GHz, 1GB RAM. I churn as many as 80,000 messages a
day through spamassassin using spamc/spamd called from procmail with a
load avg. of 1-2, sometimes spiking higher during a big spam. Sendmail
is the MTA and there is no virus filtering on this box (that happens
before it gets t
> "g" == gabriel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
g> Hi. I'm currently evaluating SpamAssassin for use in filtering /
g> tagging spam, and I'm curious to know how well it performs. That is, on
g> a given bit of hardware, let's say P-III @ 1GHz, 1GB Ram, about how many
g> messages could spam
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 01:50:33PM -0700, Kevin Gagel wrote:
> Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
> skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
> seconds.
Yeah, it's the basic definition of "distributed system" (when a sys
Kevin Gagel wrote:
>
> Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
> skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
> seconds.
> > > What I want to be able to say is something like "a Pentium IV with 512Mb of RAM
>and
> > > a SCSI d
Hi,
AMD 1.2 Ghz with 256 meg ram
Approx 200K messages a day
No network tests except a local DCC server
Average time is 1.13 seconds, probably due to the odd spam that times out on
the MX lookup which I've changed to a default of 2 instead of 3.
I'm not running without Network tests, I just set
begin quote from Kevin Gagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> written 2002-09-24:
Here's a sampling from my logs:
13:10:53 filter1 spamd[29471]: clean message (0/8) for (unknown):100 in 0
seconds.
Sep 3 13:10:59 filter1 spamd[29472]: clean message (0/8) for (unknown):100 in
0 seconds.
Sep 3 13:11:10 fil
Quoting Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Does anyone have hard data about msgs/sec SA performance? I'd like to know
> what
> hardware/software you use (cpu, ram, hd type/size/speed, os, smtp server
> soft,
> anything else you find relevant).
I'm running SA on RedHat 7.3 with ext3 using th
Here is a random sampling from my server. One of the highest ones I saw in
skimming over two days worth was 47 seconds and one of the lowest I saw was 12
seconds.
Sep 24 10:30:03 spam spamd[9868]: clean message (1.9/5.0) for root:99 in 27
seconds, 4310 bytes.
Sep 24 10:30:24 spam spamd[9885]: cl
> "KG" == Kevin Gagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KG> From this message I see that processing should be around 10
KG> seconds or less on a average email if you are using Razor with
KG> SA. I am using razor and my average seems to be around 20 - 30
KG> seconds for each message. So I would like
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Gagel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 24 September 2002 17:47
> To: SpamAssassin-Talk list
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] SA performance info
>
>
> Sorry everyone I missed the original...
> From this message I see that pro
Sorry everyone I missed the original...
>From this message I see that processing should be around 10 seconds or less on a
average email if you are using Razor with SA. I am using razor and my average
seems to be around 20 - 30 seconds for each message. So I would like to know if
there is something
El 24 Sep 2002 a las 10:29, Vivek Khera escribió:
> > "MA" == Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MA> I know this is definitively a muddy item, but I have to come
> MA> through it... We are planning to integrate SA into a border smtp
> MA> gateway to process, tag and accept all mai
> "MA" == Mariano Absatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MA> I know this is definitively a muddy item, but I have to come
MA> through it... We are planning to integrate SA into a border smtp
MA> gateway to process, tag and accept all mail coming from the
MA> Internet for a large ISP.
For a "larg
28 matches
Mail list logo
