No, I love perl,
I think because it is not binary code, it is slower and use more memory, just
that.
On Wednesday 17 December 2008 14:22:20 mouss wrote:
> Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz a écrit :
> > Hey Robert
> >
> > I know, amavis is the best antispam machine for SA+Clamv, but I have a
> > little box, 256MB or ram and no swap (dont ask why). There for, because
> > amavis is running under perl, it use alot of memory and then I'm having
> > pipe errors.
>
> if you think perl is bad because it's perl, then you're on the wrong
> list ;-p
>
> > I've found how to use SA+CLAM+Postfix without Amavis.
>
> and can you tell us how you do that?
>
> don' tell me you are fork/exec-ing scripts...
>
> > However, just for
> > informative reasons I'll explain you why I wont use milters.
> >
> > Because postfix arch. email flux is like this:
> > -> pre-queue filtering -> postfix filtering (queue) -> post-queue
> > filtering ->
>
> postfix provides:
> - smtpd access restrictions (before queue)
> - (simple) header/body checks (before queue)
> - milters (depends on what the milter does)
> - proxy filters ("proxy mode")
> - content filter ("after queue" filter)
>
> ideally, an ideal combination is ideal. but which combination is ideal
> depends on the situation. in any case, tuning without measurement is
> always wrong.
>
> > This suggest that all email is got first by pre -queue filtering. This
> > is not useful for heavy-load boxes because if you set this SA as a milter
> > (postfix only supports milters in pre-queue) then SA will get 100% of
> > load.
>
> "This" is wrong.
>
> > I rather prefer to set it in post-queue (i got using pipe at master.cf)
>
> I also prefer post-queue, but for different reasons.
>
> > because, postfilx filtering (such as helo restriction, fqdn restrictions,
> > client restrictions, including rbl - but i'll use this in SA-) could be
> > applied first and then SA only will get 60% of all mails. In many
> > installations I've set, I stop much spam using helo-fqdn restriction
> > therefore SA and hole machine have a low load. Postfix basic filtering
> > it is much faster and cheaper than SA's.
>
> you have much (unjustified) "prejugés"... if you only check IPs, then a
> basic IP filter is the best you can do. but if you want more, then you
> need more...
>
> if you want a minimum overhead specialized MTA, then no available open
> source MTA will do. and no "generic" OS will do. but the advantages of
> "generic" solutions (OSes or servers) generally outweight the costs.
