Too messages in Hold folder when spamassassin is activated in MailScanner

[Israel Garcia]

Well, I have to tell you I'm continuing with the same problem with too many
messages in HOLD folder and a terrible delay (sometimes 1 hour) and because
the way my company works it's not allowed to keep messages for more than 10
min... I have to remember that when I disable spamassassin in mailscanner
everything is fine... There's no dough the cause of my problem is the high
traffic in my connection to Internet and SA and DNS timeouts. I was thinking
in change  SA for another anti-spam ..I read about Dspam (
www.nuclearelephant.com).. and I want to ask the list if Dspam can be
integrated with mailscanner...Any ideas?

thanks in advance
regards
Israel

On Nov 28, 2007 6:42 AM, Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 28/11/2007, Michael Mansour <micoots at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  On 27/11/2007, Israel Garcia wrote:
> > > On Nov 27, 2007 4:36 PM, Glenn Steen wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On 27/11/2007, Israel Garcia wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Nov 27, 2007 4:01 PM, UxBoD wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > So when disabling RBLs the problem disappears.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, the problem disapear when I turn off spamassassin completily
> in
> > > > > mailscanner config file. Sometimes I enable Spamassassin check but
> > > disable
> > > > > razor2, DCC and pyzor in spam.assassin.prefs.conf and it work
> better..
> > > BUT,
> > > > > if I fully enalbe spamassassin with DCC, razor2 and pyzor the load
> > > average
> > > > > begins to increase and thousands of mails begins comes to HOLD
> folder
> > ..
> > > Do
> > > > > you think it's time to split the load in two servers? I mean
> something
> > > like
> > > > > this:
> > > > > Router
> > > > > NAT rules to SMTP farm serves.
> > > > > I
> > > > > I
> > > > > ______________________________
> > > > > I I
> > > > > Server2 SMTP Server1 SMTP
> > > > > Mailscanner/sa Mailscanner/sa
> > > >
> > > > If the bottleneck is network-related/lookups.... this will buy you
> > > > nothing, unfortunately.
> > > I know, but how am I sure this is the cause of my problem?
> > >
> > :-) .... when you remove some load and the problem goes away:-):-).
> > How much memory/swap is used when these messages get queued and not
> > processed?
> >
> > I'm currently trouble-shooting a problem which does the same thing and
> have
> > tracked it down to the memory running out ie. mostly swap being used
> while
> > CPU's aren't (load average goes to 12 and 13 because of the heavy swap
> > usage).
> >
> > I'm organising more memory for the server at the moment, which should
> > resolve the issue.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Michael.
>
> Good point. On the other hand, you could also look at a) Why does the
> memory run out, and b) what can you do about it.
> If your MailScanner children eat up too much, one thing could be to
> lower the amount of children. If the childrens workers hang around
> waiting for slow responses, you might need look more closely on why
> that is... and correct that (in this case more RAM could be a very
> good aid, but still a band.aid where an amputation would be
> better;-):-).
>
> Anyway, I'm sure you know where to look, what to do:).
>
> Cheers
> --
> -- Glenn
> email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
> work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se
> --
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner
>
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
>
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
>



-- 
Regards;
Israel Garcia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20071129/9281bcc8/attachment.html