Minimum hardware capacity for 35k e-mail scans/day

Rick Chadderdon mailscanner at
Tue Nov 20 17:31:02 GMT 2007

Julian Field wrote:
> I'm testing it out now. If it's as good as it is reckoned to be, how
> about I make it the default in new installations? (i.e. change
> to use it)
SDBM has been criticized (and rejected for several projects) for having
a small (1Kbyte or 2Kbytes, depending on where I look) maximum record
size.  I do not know enough about the SA database to say whether this
will be a potential factor in using SDBM with SpamAssassin, but perhaps
someone with more knowledge can use this information.  If we can count
on SA always keeping the records smaller than SDBM's max, this sounds
like a good way to increase performance.  On the other hand, it's the
kind of thing that SA could cause to break with a relatively simple
change in what they store in the DB


More information about the MailScanner mailing list