Hi!
On Mon Apr 21, 2003 at 07:41:15AM +1000, Sam Varghese wrote:
> I'm writing to find out how much overhead will be created by running
> SpamAssassin on a P-133 which is already handling quite a few tasks.
[...]
> I would appreciate some feedback because I am not a techie and while I
> would like to implement SpamAssassin, I wouldn't want to slow down
> things any more than they are right now. We have only a 33.6k connection
> to the outside world as this is in a semi-rural part of Australia.
My consideration is to use procmail and spamassassin in spamd/spamc
mode. If you use spamassassin with every mail coming in your system will
end up with no memory left.
Something like this:
~/.procmailrc:
# Pipe the mail through spamassassin (replace 'spamassassin' with
# 'spamc' if you use the spamc/spamd combination)
# The condition line ensures that only messages smaller than 250 kB
# (250 * 1024 = 256000 bytes) are processed by SpamAssassin. Most spam
# isn't bigger than a few k and working with big messages can bring
# SpamAssassin to its knees.
:0fw
* < 256000
|spamc
# Mails with a score of 15 or higher are almost certainly spam (with
# 0.05% false positives according to rules/STATISTICS.txt). Let's put
# them in a different mbox. (This one is optional.)
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*|\
^X-Spam-Flag: YES
${MAIL}/spam
See http://www.procmail.org/ and http://www.spamassassin.org/ for more
information on howto setup this fab combo.
so long
Thomas
--
___ Obviously we do not want to leave zombies around.
_/___\ - W. Richard Stevens
( ^ > Thomas Krennwallner <djmaecki at ull dot at>
/ \ 1024D/67A1DA7B 9484 D99D 2E1E 4E02 5446 DAD9 FF58 4E59 67A1 DA7B
(__\/_)_ http://bigfish.ull.at/~djmaecki/
Attachment:
pgpOGOfkN0vtk.pgp
Description: PGP signature