Martin Hepworth <max...@gmail.com> wrote: Also make sure youre running a caching nameserver to help with dns requests
Drop unknown recipients at the start before SA checks really stop alot of junk too Martin On Monday, 3 October 2011, Alex B. <a...@6under.org> wrote: > > > On 2011-10-03, at 6:08 AM, Simon Loewenthal <si...@klunky.co.uk> wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> I have to set-up a few low power SA boxes. Currently I'm used to >> using Intel Xeon 2.6Ghz with 16Gb of memory, but these proposed boxes >> are small. I won't buy one unless I know it can do the job. I know the >> figures below are tiny, but I don't know the Intel Atoms and what they >> can really do. >> >> # of active Email addresses (excluding Email aliases) : 80 >> # of messages (including rejected) appox 3,500 daily >> running : Debian/ SA 3.3.1 and spamass-milter (with MTA postfix, >> clamav-milter). >> >> >> hardware: >> http://soekris.eu/shop/net6501_en/ >> 1.6 Ghz Intel Atom E660 (1 core, 2 threads) >> 1024Mb RAM >> Transcend mSATA SSD 32Gb MLC >> >> Cheers for any commentary. >> >> Best regards, Simon. > > > I would also recommend turning off as many network checks as possible in SA > due to redundant and blocking I/O taking up the majority of SA's processing > times. > > You could also try enabling the compile rule plugin (Rules2XS I believe?) and > running sa-compile, however, our in-production benchmarks did not record any > performance increases, but it may help you squeeze some slight fraction of > performance increase from your server. > > >> > -- -- Martin Hepworth Oxford, UK Cheer. I both of those by default on all builds (reject unknown rcpt, sa-compile & dns-cache on same network segment <1m/s) Cheers. -- If you cannot beat them, try to côntrole them.
