> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Matt Sergeant said: > > > > Basically a spam-check may take up to 10 seconds per mail, so > > > sendmail should run only a certain number of concurrent deliveries > > > (20 or so?) and wait for them to complete before spawning more. > > > > 10 seconds is way too long for us. We aim to get that down > to about 0.5 > > seconds or less in the next few days. > > BTW I'm assuming the various network accesses (to Razor, > DNSbls, and MX > lookups) are taking 90% of that time. > > With lots of DNS caching, local DNSbl secondarying, and fat > pipes, that > should come down nicely.
Yes, it was the network accesses. We've re-done Razor in-house anyway (sorry, but we can't release that code, which is a shame because it kicks razor's butt - does n-way replication and multi-tiered servers), and will be removing all the DNS checks (they're done directly in our qmail code upon connection). I'll still do some profiling to see if I can improve things, but it's looking good this morning (sub-second timings to check an email). Matt. ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
