AW: Using Spamd rather than the SpamAssassin Library

Drew Marshall drew.marshall at
Tue Sep 9 22:03:44 IST 2008

On 8 Sep 2008, at 17:27, Matt Hampton wrote:

> Drew Marshall wrote:
>> Interesting... So there is the potential that with say 10 children,  
>> each with 20 messages that I am going to need 200 SA children? I  
>> fear I will have run out of memory by then! Hmm...
> Nope - they are processed sequentially - each batch will open a  
> connection for the first message, wait for the response, close the  
> connection, open the connection for the second message etc
> Once each message is finished there is a short delay whilst the  
> server thread shuts down (updating bayes etc) before it can be used  
> again. So it is possible for more than one child to be open per MS  
> Child.

I had to resort to the non spamd config today. I just plain ran out of  
server before I had run out of messages :-(

I hit my max SA children and with the box starting to swap and the  
load average at 18+ decided I ought to do something about it. In order  
to look at the load issue, can your changes allow SA to be fed via  
socket as that would save some overhead? I have also amended the time  
out per child as I am sure there is something fishy going on with SA  
scanning some types of mail. I see the spamd route as giving me a good  
chance to catch the culprits as I should be able to time out one child  
and therefore one message.


In line with our policy, this message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
 content by Technology Tiger's Mail Launder system <>
Our email policy can be found at

Technology Tiger Limited is registered in Scotland with registration number: 310997
Registered Office 55-57 West High Street Inverurie AB51 3QQ

More information about the MailScanner mailing list