SpamAssassin 2.55 problem

[Julian Field]

What happened if you just switched off the Bayes engine? ("use_bayes 0" in
spam.assassin.prefs.conf)

At 23:20 29/06/2003, you wrote:
>We had this same issue this past week and had a separate thread going
>about it. (Mail getting stuck in mqueue.in). We're running on a PIII 1.7
>Ghz with 512 meg of RAM. With SpamAssassin 2.50.x everything was fine,
>handling about 15K-20K messages a day with no problem. When we upgraded
>to 2.55, very few messages would get delivered, just stuck in mqueue.in.
>
>If we disabled Spam Checks it would run fine. We ended up downgrading
>back to 2.50 and we're back to normal. Of those having this problem, if
>anyone has success with a fix/workaround, can you let me know (if not
>the list).
>
>We are going to try and increase the RAM too, but it seems odd to be
>running perfectly well with 2.50, upgrade to 2.55, and then be basically
>dead in the water. (we did add Pyzor and Razor, but disabling them did
>not make a difference, and they run fine with 2.50)
>
>Thanks,
>James
>
>On Sun, 2003-06-29 at 11:11, Richard Lynch wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-06-29 at 10:50, Julian Field wrote:
> > > At 15:45 29/06/2003, you wrote:
> > >
> > > >In the meantime I just wanted to establish that some people have
> > > >SpamAssassin 2.55 working well with the latest MailScanner.
> > >
> > > It does work just fine, but it is a resource hog.
> >
> > In my experience the biggest consumer of resources is the bayes filter
> > analysis.  You could try setting "use_bayes 0" in
> > /etc/MailScanner/spam.assassin.prefs.conf.  The bayes stuff is nice and
> > works well but it does consume a lot of resources.
> >
> > --
> > Richard Lynch <rich at mail.wvnet.edu>

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support