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

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			blarson@blars.org
With Microsoft, failure is not an option.  It is a standard feature.

Reply to: