You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Obantec Support <su...@obantec.net> on 2007/10/01 15:58:03 UTC
is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
Hi
3.2.3 SA on FC3
just need to ensure i have the master .procmailrc syntax correct for spamc
i am using
DROPPRIVS=yes
:0fw
* < 512000
| /usr/bin/spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$HOME/mail/spam
do i need to use the lock as per the procmail.example which uses
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* < 512000
| spamassassin
Mark
Re: is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
Posted by "John D. Hardin" <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Obantec Support wrote:
> From: "Matthias Häker" <mh...@its-h.de>
>
> > SPAM='spam'
> >
> > :0fw: $SPAM$LOGNAME.lock
> >
> > this will scan only one message for one user at a time.
>
> i thought the reason for using spamd/spamc was to provide a more
> efficient processing of spam thru spamassassin.
> does locking each mail coming in not increase the overhead?
No, locking the spamc rule means SA will be scanning only one message
at a time (either globally or per-user, depending on how you create
the lock), thus it *reduces* the overhead.
Locking the spamc/spamassassin rule is a resource-usage-control method
similar to limiting the number of child processes you allow spamd to
spawn.
I do this on my virtual-hosted MTA as it is very memory-limited.
If you have a well-provisioned MTA box, then don't lock the spamc
rule. Let SA scan as many messages as the resources allow, and control
resource usage through the SA maximum-child-process limit.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pelley: Will you pledge not to test a nuclear weapon?
Ahmadeinejad: CIA! Secret prison in Europe! Abu Ghraib!
-- Mahmoud Ahmadeinejad clumsily dodges a question
(60 minutes interview, 9/20/2007)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
236 days until the Mars Phoenix lander arrives at Mars
Re: is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
Posted by Obantec Support <su...@obantec.net>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthias Häker" <mh...@its-h.de>
To: "spamassassin-users" <us...@spamassassin.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
>
>
> John D. Hardin schrieb:
>> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Obantec Support wrote:
>>
>>
>>> DROPPRIVS=yes
>>> :0fw
>>> * < 512000
>>> | /usr/bin/spamc
>>> :0:
>>> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
>>> $HOME/mail/spam
>>>
>>
>
> SPAM='spam'
>
> :0fw: $SPAM$LOGNAME.lock
>
> this will scan only one message for one user at a time.
>
>
> Matthias
>
>
Hi
i thought the reason for using spamd/spamc was to provide a more efficient
processing of spam thru spamassassin.
does locking each mail coming in not increase the overhead?
Mark
Re: is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
Posted by Matthias Häker <mh...@its-h.de>.
John D. Hardin schrieb:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Obantec Support wrote:
>
>
>> DROPPRIVS=yes
>> :0fw
>> * < 512000
>> | /usr/bin/spamc
>> :0:
>> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
>> $HOME/mail/spam
>>
>
SPAM='spam'
:0fw: $SPAM$LOGNAME.lock
this will scan only one message for one user at a time.
Matthias
Re: is lock needed when using spamd/c combo
Posted by "John D. Hardin" <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Obantec Support wrote:
> DROPPRIVS=yes
> :0fw
> * < 512000
> | /usr/bin/spamc
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> $HOME/mail/spam
That looks okay. There's a more complex example at
http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/antispam that you might want to look
at.
> do i need to use the lock as per the procmail.example which uses
>
> :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> * < 512000
> | spamassassin
You only need to lock around the spamc call if you explicitly want to
scan only one message at a time. If you don't have low-resource issues
on the SA box, you probably don't need to do that.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pelley: Will you pledge not to test a nuclear weapon?
Ahmadeinejad: CIA! Secret prison in Europe! Abu Ghraib!
-- Mahmoud Ahmadeinejad clumsily dodges a question
(60 minutes interview, 9/20/2007)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
237 days until the Mars Phoenix lander arrives at Mars