Spamassassin timeouts

[Martin Hepworth]

Jonas

ah there you go then, try increasing the value for sa-timeouts and maybe
sort out a better mysql backup ;-)

-- 
Martin Hepworth
Oxford, UK


2009/7/23 Jonas A. Larsen <jonas at vrt.dk>

>  I actualy traced it down to all the timeouts happening around 05:00.
>
>
>
> That is when the mysql backup runs, so I think it must be some some sort of
> mysql being unavailable while the backup runs.
>
>
>
> I use mysql for both mailwatch and bayes.
>
>
>
> However I still believe a retry function for SA timeouts would be nice to
> have in MS.
>
>
>
> Julian: Please add it to wish list J
>
>
>
> *From:* mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info [mailto:
> mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] *On Behalf Of *Martin Hepworth
> *Sent:* 23. juli 2009 15:31
> *To:* MailScanner discussion
> *Subject:* Re: Spamassassin timeouts
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> normally this is either due to
>
> 1) DNS issues (lots of RBLs - have you got most of them turned off?),
>
> 2) bayes (have you got this running on a faster SDBM database than the
> default
>
> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&s=bayes
>
> 3) or things like DCC/pyzor/razor.
>
> Another thing to check is the SA-timeout value in MailScanner.conf, I
> normally raise this well above the 75 default to around 300 at least.
>
>
> --
> Martin Hepworth
> Oxford, UK
>
> 2009/7/23 Jonas Akrouh Larsen <jonas at techbiz.dk>
>
> Hi List
>
>
>
> Hope everyone is enjoying the summer.
>
>
>
> I got an annoying problem with SA timeouts.
>
>
>
> For the past week my sampling shows that out of 51037 mails, spamassassin
> timed out on 66 of them.
>
>
>
> This is not a big percentage obviously, but it bothers me that I have a
> pretty decent protection scheme setup which lets very few spams through.
>
>
>
> I’d actually guess that SA time outs creates as many false positives (as in
> mails MS thinks are ham) as actual spam slipping through my anti-spam rules.
>
>
>
> I was wondering if there was any way to make MS refuse to have SA timeouts
> (or maybe make it configureable to atleast try the mail again for x number
> of times before we accept to let the mail pass MS without having been
> scanned by SA)
>
>
>
> I don’t think this is possible with the current version of MS.
>
>
>
> Also note that simply increasing the sa timeout isn’t as good a solution as
> the confirable “rety behavior (in my opinion atleast)
>
>
>
> So am I alone in thinking this would be a neat addition to MS, or what do
> people think/do with sa timeouts in general?
>
>
>
>
>
> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
>
>
>
> Jonas Akrouh Larsen
>
>
>
> TechBiz ApS
>
> Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal
>
> 2300 København S
>
>
>
> Office: 7020 0979
>
> Direct: 3336 9974
>
> Mobile: 5120 1096
>
> Fax:    7020 0978
>
> Web: www.techbiz.dk
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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!
>
>
>
> --
> 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!
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20090723/24eb3cbc/attachment.html