Dan Wilder wrote: > In our case I took an old workstation, beefed up RAM and swapspace > and dedicated it to running spamd. Servers having swapspace maxed out > solved, and there's no possibility the demands of other processes > will suddenly push a well-tuned spamd off the slippery slope into > thrashing. No other processes on the old workstation consume any > significant resources.
A thought I've had, but lack of a) a budget of any size and b) a lack of *any* spare boxen of any size (spamd will not be happy on a P100/32M) has kept this option unavailable. I'm hoping the new head office I work for will take pity on me and ship me a new box soon. <g> That should be OK for quite a while. Beyond that, it looks like a server farm is Necessary. :/ I've got some vague ideas in that direction, but it'll take some experimenting to see if they will work. > At some point NFS becomes a significant overhead, at least > allowing per-user configuration via $HOME/.spamassassin/ > directories, and we may be reaching that point at times. > I'm considering turning off the per-user configuration anyway. > Nobody uses it. Or giving everybody their own home directory > on the SA box instead of NFS mounting. Unless you MUST have home directories consistent across systems, (ie, if you have shell users, or more than one spamd box), this shouldn't be a concern. > This brings up the more general question of scalability. > > I've heard from more than one sysadmin, "Yeah, we looked > at SpamAssassin but it won't scale to our volume." > > Anybody try those sorts of things? How far does it scale, > in terms of emails/week at fairly high spam ratio? Anybody > got numbers? Is this a possible FAQ entry? About the only scaleability issue I can see with spamd running on separate box(en) is the issue of syncronizing per-user Bayes, AWL, and prefs files across a farm of spamd servers. One thing that might reduce this problem is the ability to specify which spamd server gets called on for user X; this should be a relatively trivial hack into spamc with all of the other options it supports. Of course, by the time you get to that stage, you might as well us a designed-for-shared-storage system like a NetApp filer (which, IIRC, a few people here have done). <g> -kgd -- <erno> hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by OSDN developer relations Here's your chance to show off your extensive product knowledge We want to know what you know. Tell us and you have a chance to win $100 http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?HRPT1X3RYQNC5V4MLNSV3E54 _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
