We had performance problems using spamassassin on our mail machine. Mostly because it was a windows box calling a perl script which called spamassassin.
I setup a linux box and use spamd/spamc on it. I've gone from well over a minute to process a single email to an average of about 1/10th of a second by doing it this way. Both the mail server and linux box have the same hardware, 1.5 GHz with 1.5 GB of RAM. The primary diffrences being that spamd/spamc are doing the work load and that they doit on a diffrent machine dedicated to it. The cost was only the hardware. ----- Original Message Follows ----- > Jeff Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > We are looking into spamassassin, but after minimal > > testing it looks like we will grind our machine to halt > > if we have many people using it. Our mail server is a > > Sun Ultra60 with 2x450MHz CPUs and 1.2GB RAM. That > machine is server incoming mail as well as mail reading > > for our POP and IMAP clients. It is also our main > > campus file server. We have around 5000 accounts and > > deliver around 70,000 to 80,000 messages a day. Should > we be able to do it with this machine? If so, why are we > > seeing problems when only 20 of us are using > spamassassin? > I don't have numbers on Sun spamd/spamc performance, but > it should be pretty easy to measure. > > I would suggest the following: > > 1. Get a fast P4 (2.4 GHz or better) with 512 to 1024 MB > of DDR RAM > and install Linux. > > 2. Set up spamd on that machine. I would guess that a > large part of > your performance problem is probably due to not using > spamd/spamc. > If you run the "spamassassin" script instead of > spamd/spamc, the > setup cost per message is very high. > > 3. Either run spamc on your mail server or just move mail > to the P4. > If you run spamc on the mail server, make sure only > your mail > server can connect to the spamd machine. > > Your Sun server may be fast enough to avoid needing the P4 > , but I don't know. Ultra60 systems aren't all that fast > nowadays. > If you get 80,000 messages, that's an average of 1 message > per second. You should be able to easily handle that rate > (including peaks) running spamd/spamc on a fast machine. > > -- > Daniel Quinlan Linux, open source, > and http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ anti-spam > consulting > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm > Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en > _______________________________________________ > Spamassassin-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk =========================== Kevin W. Gagel -------------------------------- The College of New Caledonia Visit us at http://www.cnc.bc.ca -------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
