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

Re: Running SpamAssassin on an old Pentium

Depends on what the 80% is of, 80 e-mails out of 100 isn't all that bad but 
800 out of 1000 would be to much.  It also depends on respomse time, if you 
want the e-mails to be sorted by spamassassin and ready the next minute then 
I wouldn't, if you can wait a bit longer then I would.

Personally I wouldn't run spamassassin on a P133, I would look for a P2 333.  
That's assuming that I would want the e-mails sorted within a minute.

When I recently reinstalled my server I didn't download any e-mails from my 
pop server at my ISP until I had installed spamassassin, when I did it 
downloaded over 100 e-mails and then took quite a while sort them.  This is 
on a 1MHz processor with 32MB RAM (should have been 128MB but due to hardware 
conflicts...).  That's why my personal answer would be not to run 
spamassassin on the current specs.


On Sunday 20 Apr 2003 10:41 pm, 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.
> The box in question serves as the dial-in server for about 60 people,
> runs a caching-only DNS and also serves as a firewall.
> Since all these 60 are retired people, some of whom have multiple
> sclerosis and other ailments, they often solicit a lot of spam from
> around the net. The situation at the moment is that of the mail they get
> around 80 percent is spam.
> 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.
> The box in question has 96 meg of RAM.
> Thanks,
> Sam
> --
> Sam Varghese
> http://www.gnubies.com
> An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.

Reply to: