On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 09:41:26AM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote:
> What is your rule of thumb for the Postfix max process limit and the number
> of spamc max children?

I started with 5 and pushed it up from there when it appeared the machine
could handle it.  5 was a very cautious number; I set it so low because I
almost had a disaster with it set to something like 25.  Right now it is
set to 10.

I also used the 'smtpstone' utils that come with the Postfix source to
launch tons of mails through the setup to make sure it wouldn't suicide,
and it seems to be able to handle the bombardment with these limits.

Note that I also use "spamc_destination_recipient_limit = 1" so if a spam
comes in and has 50 recipients, that will require 50 runs through SA instead
of just 1.  Not efficient, but I did this so SA could still look up the
per-user prefs for each recipient.  But if you don't have yours set up like
this then you're in somewhat less danger of overload IMHO.

(I've considered using amavisd-new, but after looking at the package I'm
not yet confident that it will properly handle the per-user prefs; anyone
got insight?)


> I have Postfix max process set to 5 but have not been throttling spamc.  If
> the Postfix max process is set, why do you also set spamc max children?  Is

Which "max process" do you mean?  The one on smtpd?  If so, then unless
you are splitting the scanning up per-recipient (see above), then I don't
think it would be necessary for you to do anything more.  Then again, it
couldn't hurt, but AFAICT it wouldn't make any difference.


> it necessary or are there potentential situations where it may be
> beneficial?

Since with my setup the load goes up with mails with multiple recipients,
I had to place the limit on the spamc transport.


-------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to