<div class="gmail_quote">2009/4/7 Chuck Rock <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:carock@epconline.com">carock@epconline.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Kai Schaetzl <maillists <at> <a href="http://conactive.com" target="_blank">conactive.com</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
<br>
><br>
> Chuck Rock wrote on Thu, 2 Apr 2009 21:28:05 +0000 (UTC):<br>
><br>
> > I'm not using SpamAssassin, just MailScanner with antivirus.<br>
><br>
> However, SA is just for that, so use it. Don't abuse other tools for<br>
> things they were not made for.<br>
><br>
> Kai<br>
><br>
I can't overload these boxes with extra scanning. MailScanner/Sendmail is<br>
maxing out CPU and memory and adding SA will make them backlog mail for<br>
scanning until there's no possible way to catch up.<br>
<br>
They scan about 100 msgs per second and get hit with 1000 messages a second<br>
sometimes. These are quad Xeon boxes with 6 Gig RAM running clamd and<br>
MailScanner 4.61.7. Running clamscan instead of clamd used too much CPU for<br>
them to keep up. I have two identical boxes running with round robin and about<br>
once per year, they will get hit so hard I have to take one out of service to<br>
catch up over 12 hours or so. I can't realistically add another process to the<br>
cpu unless it's going to make up for it somewhere else.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Chuck<br>
<br>
p.s. bottom posting sucks<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
MailScanner mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner" target="_blank">http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner</a><br>
<br>
Before posting, read <a href="http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting" target="_blank">http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting</a><br>
<br>
Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!<br>
</font></blockquote></div><div><br></div>I'd look at using Barricade MX from those nice folks at FSL to reduce the load on the servers.<div><br></div><div>I'd also think about adding in more boxes - ideally if you loose a box the others should be able to cope with the load and in you're current situation I doubt that is the case.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Did I mention upgrading MailScanner also - there's a fair bit of speed up in there, but alot of it is related to SA speed-ups and better clamd support and the watermarking support.</div><div><br></div>
<div>How are you spam trapping these emails - just relying on RBLs or don't you bother?<br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Martin Hepworth<br>Oxford, UK<br>
</div>