MailScanner cron job?

[Eric Sandquist]

I implemented SpamAssassin a while back, before I knew about MailScanner...

SpamAssassin is not running system wide, only for a few select users...
Since the system handles alot of list server traffic via Sympa, SPAM to
those lists are rejected by default through Sympa, I don't need or want
SpamAssassin to process spam for them  too much traffic, too much load.

I worked until 3am last night to verify acceptable system load after
implementing MailScanner last night.  I disabled all SPAM related features,
since I only want to do virus scanning....

Server load is around 1.00-2.00, and during slow times is dropping down to
.10 and less...  Running MailScanner with 1 child process...  Tried it with
the default of 5, and it was too much for the system..;.

There doesn't seem to be any delays in mail traffic, but I will be planning
a hardware upgrade for this system in the near future to bring in the
SpamAssassin features system-wide in the near future... Especially since I
expect a marked increase in list-server traffic in the near future..

Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK]On
Behalf Of Tony Finch
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 7:52 AM
To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: MailScanner cron job?


Eric Sandquist <esandquist at IHMS.NET> wrote:
>
>On my system, I started using MailScanner yesterday...  Seemed to work ok
>for a while... Server load w/o is .60 - .80...  After starting it,
>activating the cron and restarting sendmail for queue.in and queue... load
>jumped to 1.2-1.7... still acceptable... Only scanning for virii...
>SpamAssassin is running through procmail for individual users with
>spamc/spamd since system wide scanning on this machine nearly killed it in
>the past...

Are you running SpamAssassin on the same machine as MailScanner? This is
not a good combination, because when MailScanner finishes handling a batch
you'll get several messages delivered at once which will cause a much
bigger spamd load spike than you would get on a system without MailScanner.
It would be better to use SpamAssassin via MailScanner and configure the
optionality using MailScanner rules files, because that gives you much
better control over the load on the machine.

Tony.
--
f.a.n.finch  <dot at dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
ARDNAMURCHAN POINT TO CAPE WRATH INCLUDING THE OUTER HEBRIDES: SOUTHWEST 4
OR
5 BACKING SOUTHEAST 5 OR 6, LATER VEERING SOUTH 5 OR 6. OCCASIONAL SHOWERS
EARLY, BECOMING CLOUDY, RAIN LATER. GOOD FALLING MODERATE IN SHOWERS THEN
RAIN. MODERATE INCREASING ROUGH.