Why is MS doing spam checks first?

[Drew Marshall]

On 3 Dec 2005, at 04:41, Remco Barendse wrote:

> I tried, but as soon as I increase the number of MailScanner  
> processes I start getting these annoying SpamAss timeouts resulting  
> in spam slipping through (which is really infuriating me because it  
> would have been killed otherwise). Without SA in between the box  
> handles 5 processes easily, it's SA that starts to be difficult.  
> (The box is only handling mail, nothing else).

Do you have a local caching name server running on that box? If not  
you ought to run one. Bind is really quite easy to set up to cache  
only (The instructions are in /etc/named/named.conf or similar). Try  
increasing the child processes one at a time until you reach the best  
you can. My old (Well OK ancient!) 450Mz P3 with 128Mb of ram will  
run 2 processes without swapping (With a maximum batch size of 25)  
and Bind so you box should manage more than it is. Have a look in the  
wiki as there are some good optimisation tips in there that will help.

Drew

-- 
In line with our policy, this message has 
been scanned for viruses and dangerous 
content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
www.themarshalls.co.uk/policy

------------------------ 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 Wiki (http://wiki.mailscanner.info/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!