MS Performance

[Ken Anderson]

You might try turning off the rbl checks in SA.
see /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf
Some rbl lookups take too long if dns is slow or connectivity is not
perfect.
Ken


Matt Laney wrote:

> Andrea,
>
>
>>Tried that [tmpfs] but it doesn't seem to help. I've put another 128 MB
>>of RAM to a total of 256MB. With or without tmpfs I can get a maximum of
>>1.72 scanned messages per second (103 msg/min). It seems to be a limit
>>of the CPU and not of the RAM.
>>
>>Could someone confirm or confute this?
>
>
>
> How are you measuring performance?  Is 'top' of any help in showing
> whether things are processor bound or memory bound or otherwise?
>
>
> I get similar performance on a dual Pentium 3 550Mhz with 1G RAM, slow
> SCSI disks, no tmpfs, sophos, with spam checks on...or at least I think
> I do, if the logs provide a decent measure.  Here's a fragment from mine:
>
> Jul 5 21:38:43 ...: New Batch: Scanning 22 messages, 75339 bytes
> Jul 5 21:38:43 ...: Spam Checks: Starting
> Jul 5 21:38:57 ...: Virus and Content Scanning: Starting
> Jul 5 21:38:58 ...: Uninfected: Delivered 22 messages
>
> It seems that the spam scans are taking roughly forever (with all that
> DNS activity, I'm not surprised) while the virus scans are moving very
> quickly...if the logs are to be believed on matters of timing.
>
>
> According to 'top', my load averages are kinda low, like .50 most of
> the time.  MailScanner never shows up as eating more than 10% of the
> accounted-for CPU time.
>
> Smells like network lag on the RBLs to me...
>
>
> -Matt
>
>
> --
> Matt Laney, mdlaney at morehouse.edu
> Network and Unix Systems Engineer
> Morehouse College --- Atlanta, GA
>
>