>-Original Message-
>From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:11 PM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: very slow performance with SA
>
>
>> 3) As a test, you might want to back out all of SARE's ru
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:19:46AM -0800, Robert Menschel wrote:
> I can't answer that rate question (is it normal?), since I don't run a
> server, but my mass-check runs process a corpus of 114241 emails
> against all distribution and SARE rules in 10 hours, giving me a rate
> slightly over 3 emai
> 3) As a test, you might want to back out all of SARE's rules and check
your
> message processing speed with stock-rules only. That should be very fast.
Or more to the point, get rid of BigEvil. That has been known to cause
exactly this problem.
Loren
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 01:39 PM 2/1/2005, Alan Shine wrote:
>
> >when I'm running SA with the default ruleset (the one that comes
> >with the installation), it proccesses 16 messages per second.
> >I don't know if it is the avarage amount of messages that SA can
proccess.
>
At 01:39 PM 2/1/2005, Alan Shine wrote:
when I'm running SA with the default ruleset (the one that comes
with the installation), it proccesses 16 messages per second.
I don't know if it is the avarage amount of messages that SA can proccess.
anyway - 16 per second is not good enough for me - becaus
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:40:35AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:>> 2. I can't figure out how to turn URIDNSBL off (I couldn't find it > >in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf). So...how can I turn it off?>Comment out the loadplugin line in init.pre>> 3. The emails t
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 11:40:35AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
> 2. I can't figure out how to turn URIDNSBL off (I couldn't find it
>in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf). So...how can I turn it off?
Comment out the loadplugin line in init.pre
> 3. The emails that are missed as spam have SA markup,
Alan Shine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:> > I understand, but allthough I'm running 5 max children ny CPU is between 0-2% idle. > > (I have dual CPU with hyper thread).> Possibly you are IO bound. Di
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:59:02AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
>
> I understand, but allthough I'm running 5 max children ny CPU is between 0-2%
> idle.
>
> (I have dual CPU with hyper thread).
>
Possibly you are IO bound. Did you turn off bayes/awl? Maybe you're
running URIDNSBL which may not
Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:39:14AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:>> >>I have one spamd - with the default of 5 max children.>>>This is likely your problem, if you are truly processing at 16 a sec>then 5 children probably won't handle the load. Try upping the nu
On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 10:39:14AM -0800, Alan Shine wrote:
>
> I have one spamd - with the default of 5 max children.
>
This is likely your problem, if you are truly processing at 16 a sec
then 5 children probably won't handle the load. Try upping the number
of children available. The optimal
Hi,
thanks a lot for your answers, I wrote my responses right after every answer.
>jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>It sounds like you are trying to run DNS based rules either without a>DNS or off a test site that does not exist anymore. Some of the BLs that>used to be available are gone.
>And you
At 08:28 AM 2/1/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
know issue with sa 3.0x and spamc/spamd. Will ne Fixed with 3.10
work around is lower number of children allowed or apply following patches..
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3983
That really should only be an issue if you are running m
At 06:27 AM 2/1/2005, Alan Shine wrote:
I'm new to SA, and currently testing it in order to integrate it with our
systems.
The performance appears to be very bad - 6 messages per second.
I'm running SA 3.0.1 on DL380 - dual CPU, hyper thread, 4G RAM, with Redhat 8.
spamd is running with the rules
It sounds like you are trying to run DNS based rules either without a
DNS or off a test site that does not exist anymore. Some of the BLs that
used to be available are gone.
And you should upgrade to 3.0.2 for some stability reasons.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Alan Shine" <[EMAIL
Hi Alan,
I found out the hard way about this
problem as well. Here's the response I got previously on this issue:
Martin Hepworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
01/19/2005 01:02 PM
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject
Re: New to SA, problems with production
speed
16 matches
Mail list logo
