FreeBSD

[Ugo Bellavance]

> At 19:22 29.9.2003, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >    I searched the list and the net a bit, and I didn't find 
> any special
> > discussion about the FreeBSD port.  Installation, performance?
> Mailscanner 4.22-5 is in FreeBSD ports and is really easy to 
> set up as it
> does all but configure mailscanner and spamassassin for you.
> Performance is no problem if you have enough RAM - go with 
> 384MB or more to
> feel comfortable. It does not work bad with 256MB either if machine is
> dedicated to Mailscanner..

I run a small dedicated MailScanner machine, about 400 e-mails/day.
 
> >   I am running RH9 right now and it seems to be heavy on 
> RAM use, even if
> > I disabled all useless services and tweaked all the others 
> to make sure
> > RAM usage is low.  I am tempted by putting my MS system on 
> FreeBSD.  4.8
> > or 5.1, I'm not sure.
> 4.22-5 with SA needs approx 35megs per daemon while 4.23-11 needs 38.
> Without SA it needs 18 megs per daemon.
> 

Wow, would you believe that I run it on only 64 MB?  Of course, this only a test machine, but it is working well.  Without SA, I don't see significative delays, but with SA, messages take about 3 min to be processed.  However, since I whitelisted the main contacts, it isn't that bad.  Yes it swaps.

> 
> >    Comments?
> Both should work fine.
> 
> Go with this idea, because you will spend less time updating 
> OS just to
> keep machine secure 

Hmmm, I update my RH with apt-get every night, automatically.

and FreeBSD ports have proper patches 
> already present -
> like the one for razor in order for SA 2.60 to work properly. 
> MS is nice
> product which gets better and better with additional 
> tweaking, but even
> defaults are good start.

I know.  I'm now far from the defaults (i think) since I played with it a lot, but it is effectively doing a terrific job here.

> 
> Tomaz
> 

Ugo