You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Jason Haar <Ja...@trimble.co.nz> on 2004/11/03 03:12:47 UTC
Does (Unix sockets) spamd still pipe the mail message?
Hi there
I was wondering if spamd in Unix socket mode is still piped the whole
message by spamc - or if it just passes the filename, and then spamd opens
that/etc.
It seems to me that could improve performance (a little bit) - a whole
bunch of I/O could be skipped...
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1
Re: Does (Unix sockets) spamd still pipe the mail message?
Posted by Jason Haar <Ja...@trimble.co.nz>.
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 11:10:04PM -0500, Dave Goodrich wrote:
> What about those of us using spamd on another host? I would have to then
> access a file on a shared (NFS) volume. I can't believe that the IO of
> NFS would perform better than piping the message. But, I am just getting
> my teeth into NFS, educate me ;^)
I never said remove the TCP option! :-) Obviously network-based solutions
need a network based SA.
I'm just saying that there would be a performance gain in dealing with files
over Unix sockets instead of pipes (with local filesystems! :-). Whether
that gain is worth it is arguable - and hence my question.
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1
Re: Does (Unix sockets) spamd still pipe the mail message?
Posted by Dave Goodrich <ld...@tls.net>.
Jason Haar wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 11:43:30AM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 03:12:47PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote:
>>
>>>It seems to me that could improve performance (a little bit) - a whole
>>>bunch of I/O could be skipped...
>>
>>It's the whole message. Most of the time spamc gets data from STDIN, so
>>there's no filename to pass. That also means no dealing with permissions,
>
>
> Well - I'd say not really to that...
>
> I mean most SA installs are using it as part of a MTA (Qmail-Scanner,
> milter, etc) - so the calling process has the email on disk as a file, and
> then pipes it into spamc. Having spamc call a filename would remove a good
> chunk of IO.
What about those of us using spamd on another host? I would have to then
access a file on a shared (NFS) volume. I can't believe that the IO of
NFS would perform better than piping the message. But, I am just getting
my teeth into NFS, educate me ;^)
DAve
--
Systems Administrator
http://www.tls.net
Get rid of Unwanted Emails...get TLS Spam Blocker!
Re: Does (Unix sockets) spamd still pipe the mail message?
Posted by Jason Haar <Ja...@trimble.co.nz>.
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 11:43:30AM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 03:12:47PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote:
> > It seems to me that could improve performance (a little bit) - a whole
> > bunch of I/O could be skipped...
>
> It's the whole message. Most of the time spamc gets data from STDIN, so
> there's no filename to pass. That also means no dealing with permissions,
Well - I'd say not really to that...
I mean most SA installs are using it as part of a MTA (Qmail-Scanner,
milter, etc) - so the calling process has the email on disk as a file, and
then pipes it into spamc. Having spamc call a filename would remove a good
chunk of IO.
As far as perms go - yes you are right. But most MTAs using SA would be
standalone - so having spamd running as the same userid as the MTA bits
isn't much to ask.
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1
Re: Does (Unix sockets) spamd still pipe the mail message?
Posted by Theo Van Dinter <fe...@kluge.net>.
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 03:12:47PM +1300, Jason Haar wrote:
> It seems to me that could improve performance (a little bit) - a whole
> bunch of I/O could be skipped...
It's the whole message. Most of the time spamc gets data from STDIN, so
there's no filename to pass. That also means no dealing with permissions,
etc, etc.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
Q. How many Microsoft Engineers does it take to change a light bulb ?
A. None. Bill Gates will just redefine Darkness (TM) as the new
industry standard. ;)