Dear Sirs, 

 I appreciate your help 

 Then the problem would not be the low ram? 


I will implement improvements in the configuration  suggested and
observe the results, however, that more could be suggested to improve
my spam service? 

 This is my current memory usage:

             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:           501        284        216          0         24         41
-/+ buffers/cache:        218        282
Swap:         1027         59        968

 Thanks for your time and support.

Jose Luis

> Subject: Re: Problems with high spam
> From: guent...@rudersport.de
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:15:14 +0200
> 
> On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 02:23 -0400, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
> > 2009/9/18 Karsten Bräckelmann:
> > > This machine NEEDS more RAM. In fact, I'd guess half of the spam
> > > slipping through is due to timeouts. Thrashing into hell.
> > 
> > throwing ram at a server is not a solution in this case.  512MB is
> > sufficient to handle this mail load, as indicated by his post showing
> > little swap utilization on the system and confirmed by my real world
> 
> You're right, Aaron, the output of 'free' suggests this is not actually
> a problem.
> 
> Alas, even though I asked repeatedly, this data point was given after
> that post of mine, and I was limited to very little info and some
> observations.
> 
> > experience. here we handle over 1 million messages per day per node,
> > each node has 1GB ram.   ram required is easily calculated by base
> > services + SA instance usage X number of instances you'd like to use.
> > having less instances generally just means slight (very slight in most
> > cases) delays.  having more instances than your ram can contain means
> > big delays.   properly configured server will not start swapping and
> > falling over when a flood of mail comes in, mail simply spends more
> > time in queue.  the difference between 1 second and 1 minute in queue
> > is not usually significant to users.
> > 
> > the problem here is bad administration.  hopefully with the advice
> > given on list and better yet some time spent studying docs, this can
> > be corrected.
> 
> -- 
> char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
> main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
> (c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
> 
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

Reply via email to