Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Helmut Schneider
Helmut Schneider wrote: > with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance > problem: I might have been able to "catch" a non-confident example mail[1] (bad example because of the size, but an example). While SA 3.2.5 needs ~45 seconds, with SA 3.3.1: Jun 4 03:36:41.029 [564

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Ted Mittelstaedt
On 6/3/2010 7:52 AM, Helmut Schneider wrote: Helmut Schneider wrote: with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance problem: [...] Any idea where to start? Appendix: I set up a fresh and clean FreeBSD 8.0 with only SA 3.3.1 and Perl 5.10.1_1 and the problem still pers

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Lee Dilkie
On 6/3/2010 12:02 PM, Charles Gregory wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Helmut Schneider wrote: >> I then started from scratch and tried with SA 3.2.5. The particular >> body_tests take only 5 seconds (instead of 30). > > As I mentioned before, I noticed this difference myself, and presumed > it was jus

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Charles Gregory
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Mark Martinec wrote: Here is one common problem of 'certain mail messages' taking a long time to process - unresolvable for now: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5590 Sorry, but that bug has been around since 3.2.3 - it would not explain a sudden sixf

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Mark Martinec
On Thursday 03 June 2010 18:02:23 Charles Gregory wrote: > As I mentioned before, I noticed this difference myself, and presumed it > was just a characteristic of the 'improved' logic for deep-scanning the > body of emails, and perhaps just a larger number of rules than before > Though I am sti

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Charles Gregory
On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, Helmut Schneider wrote: I then started from scratch and tried with SA 3.2.5. The particular body_tests take only 5 seconds (instead of 30). As I mentioned before, I noticed this difference myself, and presumed it was just a characteristic of the 'improved' logic for deep-sc

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-03 Thread Helmut Schneider
Helmut Schneider wrote: > with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance > problem: [...] > Any idea where to start? Appendix: I set up a fresh and clean FreeBSD 8.0 with only SA 3.3.1 and Perl 5.10.1_1 and the problem still persists. I then removed all packages, compiled per

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-02 Thread Benny Pedersen
On Wed 02 Jun 2010 09:52:51 PM CEST, Helmut Schneider wrote Hi, with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance problem: [/var/amavis/tmp]# spamassassin -D -lint < doh :) - != -- /var/amavis/tmp/amavis-20100602T192227-44802/email.txt Jun 2 21:37:08.809 [50826] warn: T

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-02 Thread Helmut Schneider
David Michaels wrote: > Quoting "Helmut Schneider" : > > > Hi, > > > > with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance > > problem: [...] > > timing: total 36840 ms - init: 3827 (10.4%), parse: 43 (0.1%), > > extract_message_metadata: 822 (2.2%), get_uri_detail_list: 178 > >

Re: Performance problem body tests

2010-06-02 Thread David Michaels
Quoting "Helmut Schneider" : Hi, with certain mails on FreeBSD 8.0 and SA 3.3.1 I have a performance problem: [/var/amavis/tmp]# spamassassin -D -lint < /var/amavis/tmp/amavis-20100602T192227-44802/email.txt Jun 2 21:37:08.809 [50826] warn: The -l option has been deprecated and is no longer s