Re: Spam on the BTS
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 06:59:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> CBL has the advantage that you can make a local copy of the list
> (which reduces name server load and avoids the name lookup latency),
> but its license is somewhat non-free. Is this a problem for Debian?
spohr is already running a nameserver, so it would have to run on an
alternate port. I havn't looked into how hard it would be to convice
spamassassin to use something like this.
> What's causing most of the load right now? I think some of the effort
> should probably concentrate on getting legitimate mail through faster.
spamscan is single-threaded, and the latency of DNSBL lookups is the
main delay. We have less than 1 second to process each message on
average. Any good recomendations for a perl inter-process
communications library? Once it becomes multi-threaded CPU usage
could become an issue, especially if we upgrade to spamassassin 3.
Blars Blarson firstname.lastname@example.org
With Microsoft, failure is not an option. It is a standard feature.