Well, that wasn't it. On my test system, it lost about 10 seconds firing up SPAMD, and ran quickly after that (I guess I could run it a second time - Yes, that's the ticket). I'm using mostly default 3.0.1 rules.
041127 074235: Q:bigspam1; Delta T: 15,593 ms (783); In X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=10.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_24_48,DIET_1, FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_40_50,HTML_COMMENT_SHORT,HTML_FONT_BIG, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,HTML_TITLE_UNTITLED,MIME_HTML_ONLY, MSGID_OUTLOOK_INVALID,MSGID_SPAM_ZEROES,RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY, STOCK_ALERT autolearn=no version=3.0.1 Log entry after SPAMD already running. 041127 074741: Q:bigspam1; Delta T: 953 ms (783); In X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=10.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_24_48,DIET_1, FORGED_OUTLOOK_HTML,HTML_40_50,HTML_COMMENT_SHORT,HTML_FONT_BIG, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY,HTML_TITLE_UNTITLED,MIME_HTML_ONLY, MSGID_OUTLOOK_INVALID,MSGID_SPAM_ZEROES,RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY, STOCK_ALERT autolearn=no version=3.0.1 Sub-second. Now THAT's performance. Looks like a very different set of rules. The body raw rules can be quite "expensive" but I'm not sure what (if any) raw body rules are in 3.0.1 by default. Dan -----Original Message----- From: Matthias Keller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 7:37 AM To: Dan Barker Subject: Re: FW: TIMING [total 846599 ms] ??? Hi Dan Here you are Matt Dan Barker wrote: >Zip it up and send it over. I'll run it through 3.0.1. > >Dan > >-----Original Message----- >From: Matthias Keller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 4:06 PM >To: users@SpamAssassin.apache.org >Subject: Re: TIMING [total 846599 ms] ??? > > >Dallas L. Engelken wrote: > > > >>>debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so >>>far=8.789 There it stays for ages, using 100% cpu >>> >>>Any known problem? I'd be happy to provide the mail in >>>question to anyone interested. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>Time for you to upgrade. If the problem still exists in 3.0.1, please >>let us know. :) >>Dallas >> >> >> >> >Yeah I know, but since I need to update amavis aswell for that I'm a bit >cautious and will first have to test the whole setup on a test machine, >which at the moment I just dont have time for.... > >But if you want I can send you the msg so that you can test it on 301 if >you're interested.... > >Matt > > > >
