[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: possible mass bug filing: spamassassin 3

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 06:03:18PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote:
> > (And my "home server" is a AMD K6-II 450, with 192MB RAM, not bad for my
> > own amount of daily mail)
> Perhaps you simply need to tune the -m option. Spamassassin has
> switched to a preforking model (similar to apache) rather than a
> spawning option, so the number specified by -m should be decreased.

To '-m 1' ? Even that will be too much for SA3 to fit in 192MB of RAM;
and the throughput will be *bad*...

Even if SA3 has better ways to stop spam, that doesn't mean SA2 suddenly
stopped doing what it does. It's a trade-off people have to make; either
they buy bigger, larger, better servers to manage the incoming spam, or
they cope with more SPAM. Is it that hard to understand?

     smog  |   bricks
 AIR  --  mud  -- FIRE
soda water |   tequila
 -- with thanks to fortune

Reply to: