Bowie Bailey wrote:
DAve wrote:
Ed Russell wrote:
2. Once this is in place should I re-activate pzyor, dcc or razor?
Is one better than the other? Are there advantages to either?
I use neither, though I think I am in the minority. I routinely check
my spam and I have found that bayes, rayzor, dcc, and most of the
SARE rules catch little if any spam "for me". So I don't run them and
save the CPU for additional spamd processes.
That's odd. Bayes, Razor2, DCC work quite well for me. Check out my
stats from today:
TOP SPAM RULES FIRED
------------------------------------------------------------
RANK RULE NAME COUNT %OFRULES %OFMAIL %OFSPAM
%OFHAM
------------------------------------------------------------
1 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 1280 5.02 48.05 83.33
0.98
2 RAZOR2_CHECK 1259 4.94 47.26 81.97
1.15
3 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 1164 4.56 43.69 75.78
0.27
------------------------------------------------------------
Razor2 caught 83% of the spam, DCC caught 68%, and Bayes got 64%.
They tagged plenty of spam for me, no doubt about that. But they caught
only a few spam that SA wouldn't have caught without them. It is rare
that bayes points on top of existing points ever made the score squeek
over the threshold.
Not using them however, dropped my CPU, network, and memory requirements
so much I could run twice as many spamd processes. Processing time went
from an average of 10 seconds (with all SARE rules, bayes, DCC, Razor)
to 2 seconds (limited SARE, no bayes, no razor, no dcc).
All the SARE rules loaded makes spamd run about 45-75mb each, selective
SARE rules and I can see spamd drop to 23-35mb. More spamd, faster spamd.
Of course tommorrow, everything could change ;^)
DAve
