You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Rainer Bendig aka Ny <li...@unresolvedissue.org> on 2004/11/25 23:47:24 UTC
long scanning time
Hi,
first of all, this is my first post to this list, if this is the wrong
place for signed messages please tell and i'll turn it off.
Now to my problem:
I am using spamassassin Version 3.0.1-1 from debian unstable and i am
invoking spamc via my ~/.procmailrc as postet here:
----8<--- ~/.procmailrc ---
### spamassassin
:0fw: spamassassin.lock
* < 256000
| spamc
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
$MYHOME/spams-$MONTHEXT
:0:
* ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
$MYHOME/spams-maybe-$MONTHEXT
----8<--------------------
my /etc/spamassassin/local.cf is looking as posted here:
----8<--- /etc/spamassassin/local.cf --
rewrite_header Subject *****SPAM*****
report_safe 0
ok_languages de en
---------------------------------------
And for a 8593 bytes large e-Mail it need 6.3 seconds to scan (spamd
syslog message)
At the moment i am not using pyzor, dcc or razor.
spamd|spamc are talkong via tcp/ip but are on the same machine, maybe
i can boost it a little bit using unix sockets?
I think an avarage time of 5 - 7 seconds for a message are to for
scanning.
The neg of the bottle is not the hardware, its overhead for
spamscanning...
P4 2.8 GHz, 1024 Megs of RAM
output of vmstat is this:
procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- ----cpu----
r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa
0 0 0 361184 36 406736 0 0 18 26 1060 831 5 1 94 0
Spamassassin is fed with thousands of ham mails from the mailinglists,
and so i think this cant be the reason.
Any hints?
thanks in advice
Rainer
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer 'Ny' Bendig | http://UnresolvedIssue.org | GPG-Key: 0xCC7EA575
Re: long scanning time
Posted by Rainer Bendig aka Ny <li...@unresolvedissue.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Matias Lopez Bergero, *,
Matias Lopez Bergero wrote on Fri Nov 26, 2004 at 04:27:20PM -0300:
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Utf8Performance
>
> Maybe it helps you.
No it didn't. I am not running on UTF8 ... my System is still set to
ny@nys:~$ locale
LANG=de_DE@euro
LC_CTYPE="de_DE@euro"
LC_NUMERIC="de_DE@euro"
LC_TIME="de_DE@euro"
LC_COLLATE="de_DE@euro"
LC_MONETARY="de_DE@euro"
LC_MESSAGES="de_DE@euro"
LC_PAPER="de_DE@euro"
LC_NAME="de_DE@euro"
LC_ADDRESS="de_DE@euro"
LC_TELEPHONE="de_DE@euro"
LC_MEASUREMENT="de_DE@euro"
LC_IDENTIFICATION="de_DE@euro"
LC_ALL=
- --
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer 'Ny' Bendig | http://UnresolvedIssue.org | GPG-Key: 0xCC7EA575
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBp5TptpAZoWtAN98RAqgiAJ9MQXd6CMkRUlWDMPAfeoFu182XdwCfRl2y
SQD8fWFkicsq3/FLUXJxkjo=
=zUfK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: long scanning time
Posted by Matias Lopez Bergero <ml...@udesa.edu.ar>.
Rainer Bendig aka Ny wrote:
> I am using spamassassin Version 3.0.1-1 from debian unstable and i am
> invoking spamc via my ~/.procmailrc as postet here:
>
> And for a 8593 bytes large e-Mail it need 6.3 seconds to scan (spamd
> syslog message)
>
>
> The neg of the bottle is not the hardware, its overhead for
> spamscanning...
> P4 2.8 GHz, 1024 Megs of RAM
I have almost the same system, Xeon 2.80GHz, 1,5GB of memory, and I was
experiencing the same problem until I read this:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Utf8Performance
Maybe it helps you.
BR,
MatÃas.