SpamAssassin.cache.db Question.

[Randal, Phil]

There's a performance gain unless you're really short of RAM and using
tmpfs forces stuff into swap.

Current db size here is:

-rw-------  1 root root 3154944 Feb  1 13:02 SpamAssassin.cache.db

so it's not exactly huge.

Oldest data in the cache is 55 hours old.

The only downside is that you lose the cache on reboot.  It will get
rebuilt, so that's no disaster.

Cheers,

Phil

----
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info 
> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf 
> Of Xterm1
> Sent: 01 February 2006 12:33
> To: MailScanner discussion
> Subject: SpamAssassin.cache.db Question.
> 
> 
> 
> 	List,
> 
> 	I have my version of MailScanner "4.50.14-1" running on 
>    CentOS 4.2. I was wondering about the effect of running
>   /var/spool/MailScanner/incoming in a tmpfs file system 
> according to this link...
> 
> http://www.sng.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailscanner/serve/cache/120.html
> 
> 
> 	Reason I ask is, the new setting for the db file for 
> spamassassin is here.. 
> /var/spool/MailScanner/incoming/SpamAssassin.cache.db .
> 
> 	Any thoughts or comments?
> 
> Brian
>