Mailscanner and server load

[Martin Hepworth]

<x-flowed>
Hi

surbl of pretty good at keeping the load DOWN, especially in comparison
to the fixed rules lists it replaced (bigevil etc).

Have you got a local DNS server (caching or normal) running on this
machine? If not I heavily suggest you install a caching name server on
the MailScanner box.

Also what extra SA rules have you got installed???

--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300


kfliong wrote:
> I have just implemented SURBL. Server load shot up and stays around 30
> making websites unaccessable. I have now edited SURBL to only check on
> SPAMCOP_URI_RBL. I have disabled the other 3. Now my load averages around
> 12. This is still quite high.
>
> BTW, after some monitoring using "top", I notice that my system is quite
> RAM intensive. But "top" can't tell for sure. What other tools can I use to
> see whether the highload is due to lots of disk accesses (due to not having
> enough RAM).
>
> At 03:26 PM 26/8/2004, you wrote:
>

**********************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.

**********************************************************************

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
</x-flowed>