Re: spamassassin - three basic questions
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 12:16:37PM -0500, Levi Waldron wrote:
> On February 21, 2003 11:24 am, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > Maybe not necessary, but, unless your mailserver is horribly slow,
> > it'll be done so quick that it's not going to hurt anything anyhow.
>
> I actually find spamassassin runs pretty slowly on my K6-2/500MHz 384MB
> machine (I know it's not real fast but not a dinosaur either). It takes
> about 5-10 seconds per message, so before I started filtering my debian-user
> messages before processing, it was prohibitive.
That sounds unreasonably slow to me, too. I currently run two
mailservers, a P3/1GHz 256M at work and a Athlon 900 256M at home.
Both are scanning all inbound mail using spamd. Looking over the
logs, I see that I'm running at 0 seconds for about 85% of messages
and 1 second for almost all the rest.
I bet you're not running spamd, which means you're taking the hit for
starting up perl on every message scanned. That would hurt pretty
bad, now that I think about it...
--
The freedoms that we enjoy presently are the most important victories of the
White Hats over the past several millennia, and it is vitally important that
we don't give them up now, only because we are frightened.
- Eolake Stobblehouse (http://stobblehouse.com/text/battle.html)
Reply to: