I did that - with DNSBL off there are no port 53 communications from SA --
Jason Philbrook wrote: > > I would run a tcpdump on the ethernet interface while doing this, just > in case there are network tests happening that you are not aware of. > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:55:21PM -0700, poifgh wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> I was measuring how quickly could SA [spam assassin] process spams when >> several SA processes are run in parallel over separate mbox files. I used >> a >> 8 core machine. Below are the numbers when I forked different number of >> processes. >> >> Fork = 8; >> Rate = 57 msgs/sec >> >> Fork = 4; >> Rate = 44 msgs/sec >> >> Fork = 1; >> Rate = 22 msgs/sec >> >> >> I ran freshly build SA with Bayes and DNSBL turned off. Why am I not >> seeing >> a linear increase in the throughput? Is a file locking creating the >> bottleneck? If yes, which particular file is being locked? If no, what >> could >> be the reason for this? >> >> thnx >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Parallelizing-Spam-Assassin-tp24751958p24751958.html >> Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- > /* > Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL > KB1IOJ | Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting > http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Maine http://www.midcoast.com/ > */ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Parallelizing-Spam-Assassin-tp24751958p24796555.html Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
