mailscanner/spamassassin strangeness

Julian Field jkf at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Wed Jan 30 13:22:47 GMT 2002


At 12:30 30/01/2002, you wrote:
>Not sure what we can do with these examples though (or if I should have
>them at all) if we have RIPA looking over our shoulders!

You shouldn't keep them at all, I'm afraid. The only reason you can keep
them is as part of running your normal service, which would be stretching
the point here a little.

>As a BTW, with the increased processing load imposed by the changes you
>made in 3.04-1, we have had to postpone the roll-out of SpamAssassin to
>our busy Mail Hubs. They are now struggling to hanle the incoming mail
>load as it is.

I knew this would happen, but unfortunately there's no way around it. You
now have to process every single message, including plain-text messages,
and there isn't really any way to speed this up significantly. Sorry about
that.

>However it is recognised here that MailScanner and uvscan (and
>SpamAssassin) are essential tools so we will be able to upgrade the
>platforms (currently  400MHz Ultra-5_10's with 384MB) once we have
>identified suitable hardware.

How many messages per day do you process on an Ultra 5? I would be
interested to hear what the maximum load is that an Ultra 5 can take.
--
Julian Field                Teaching Systems Manager
jkf at ecs.soton.ac.uk         Dept. of Electronics & Computer Science
Tel. 023 8059 2817          University of Southampton
                             Southampton SO17 1BJ



More information about the MailScanner mailing list