Florin Andrei said:
> Has anyone compared spampd and spamproxyd in terms of speed and > reliability under high load? From what I hear, spampd is much better. > What is the best solution for interfacing Postfix and SpamAssassin for > servers under high load? (seems to me like spampd/spamproxyd are the > best idea, but perhaps i'm wrong) > I sort of like spampd, it has a pre-fork model "a la Apache", and some > other nifty things, but i wonder if there are any possible improvements > to it... it certainly looks very nifty. > Did you considered including spampd with SpamAssassin, or do you think > spamproxyd fits the bill? spamproxyd is no longer included with SpamAssassin ;) I'd recommend spampd. --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
