<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16555"></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=509144116-21062014><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2 face=Arial>My setup results in a 40x code if spamd is down, any sysyem
running *any* daemon that is important should be using monitoring of some kind
to make sure the processes are up and running, that includes MailScanner. I
actualy ping spamd as well as checking for the running process just
incase.</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Jerry
Benton<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 19, 2014 3:30 PM<BR><B>To:</B> MailScanner
discussion<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: 2 fold question<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>- A spamd failure failure results in email not being scanned for spam
as I just fixed this on a client’s servers. Nothing was getting marked as spam
and it turns out that spamd was not even running on his system. Email was still
being processed and delivered by MailScanner. OF course, I have also seen
systems continue to retry over and over again when the socket isn’t
available.
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>- spamd is faster because it doesn’t have to spin up every time. There is a
big difference on a server processing 300k emails a day.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>- I have never seen memory leaks with spamd. It is a rather solid
product. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>- If your server is using all of its memory, it is supposed to. That is
what linux does. It is normal behavior. </DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV apple-content-edited="true">
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>-</DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">Jerry
Benton</DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><A
href="http://www.mailborder.com">www.mailborder.com</A></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><BR></DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline></DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On Jun 19, 2014, at 8:36 PM, Rick Cooper <<A
href="mailto:rcooper@dwford.com">rcooper@dwford.com</A>> wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Mailscanner is fine with spamd restarting same as when
clamd reloads, when<BR>spamd restarts (IIRC) it's children finish processing
before dying. I used<BR>spamd with MailScanner for several years now and have
had not issues, same<BR>score and as far as performance (speed) it's pretty
much six of one and half<BR>dozen of the other. I origianlly setup timers on
both and ran both on each<BR>email and one might be a very bit faster on a
given email and then flip so<BR>pretty much even, would say over all no
difference, resource wise very big<BR>difference. Now I don't have 200,000
emails a day but I would bet that spamd<BR>would out perform the MailScanner
implemenation on a very busy server <BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>[<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A>]
On Behalf Of Randal,<BR>Phil<BR>Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:32 AM<BR>To:
MailScanner discussion<BR>Subject: RE: 2 fold question<BR><BR>A spamd failure
could let a lot of spam through (or a backlog of unprocessed<BR>email,
depending on how it was implemented).<BR><BR>Memory leaks in spamd could also
prove problematic, unless it had scheduled<BR>restarts, assuming that
MailScanner could cope with that.<BR><BR>Nonetheless, it would be interesting
to compare the performance of a spamd<BR>version with the current
implementation.<BR><BR>Slower, I suspect, but less of a memory
hog.<BR><BR>Cheers,<BR><BR>Phil<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: <A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>[<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A>]
On Behalf Of Remco<BR>Barendse<BR>Sent: 19 June 2014 15:52<BR>To: MailScanner
discussion<BR>Subject: RE: 2 fold question<BR><BR>What a pity, before i
wouldn't care about how much memory any given app<BR>would use, now that i
have virtualized everything, it starts to matter :))<BR><BR>There are some
people still working on MailScanner (believe they moved the<BR>sources to
github) but have never seen a new release. Maybe the way forward<BR>would be
to fork the code, supposedly there are some fixes in github that<BR>would also
resolve the problem of the huge pileup of tmp files.<BR><BR>Thanks for
explaining the differences between the 3 different ways of<BR>calling
clamav!<BR><BR>On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Rick Cooper wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">ClamAV uses the command line clamscan for scanning,
is slow (have to<BR>load dbs) and a bit of a resource hog, ClamAV module is
a perl<BR>interface to libclamav and is also a hog because it loads a copy
of the db<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>into memory for each child but only has to do it
when MailScanner loads that<BR>child the first time. The best choice is
neither, use clamd.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR>clamd shares the resources between children and
thus the real memory<BR>per child is much less and a far less load, is not
perl. When<BR>MailScanner uses clamd it talks directly to the clam daemon
and<BR>doesn't have to load anything at all, just tell the daemon
where/what<BR>to scan<BR><BR>IMHO the same thing should be done with spamd,
I wrote the code years<BR>ago and it's really no faster (or at least
negligibly so) but far less<BR>memory and resources once again, than using
the perl interface. It was<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>difficult to get Julian to
incorporate the clamd code but he never did<BR>incorporate the spamd code
unfortunatly.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
type="cite"><BR>Rick<BR><BR>______________________________________________________________________<BR>______________________________________________________________________<BR>_____________<BR>From:
<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>[<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A>]
On Behalf Of<BR>Philip Parsons<BR>Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 6:27
PM<BR>To: MailScanner discussion<BR>Subject: RE: 2 fold
question<BR><BR>Anyone able to answer the first part of my question ? whats
the diff<BR>between using clamav or clamavmodule<BR><BR><BR><BR>From: <A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>[<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A>]
On Behalf Of<BR>Philip Parsons<BR>Sent: June-18-14 1:56 PM<BR>To:
MailScanner discussion<BR>Subject: RE: 2 fold question<BR><BR><BR><BR>Did
that no go same error.<BR><BR><BR><BR>From: <A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>[<A
href="mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info">mailto:mailscanner-bounces@lists.mailscanner.info</A>]
On Behalf Of<BR>Jeremy McSpadden<BR>Sent: June-18-14 1:01 PM<BR>To:
MailScanner discussion<BR>Subject: Re: 2 fold question<BR><BR><BR><BR>You
could have a corrupted db file. wipe all files
in<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>/usr/local/share/clamav/ and run freshclam .. see if it
starts then.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR>--<BR>Jeremy McSpadden<BR>Flux Labs | <A
href="http://www.fluxlabs.net">http://www.fluxlabs.net</A> | Endless
Solutions Office :<BR>850-250-5590x501 | Cell : 850-890-2543 | Fax :
850-254-2955<BR><BR><BR><BR>On Jun 18, 2014, at 2:43 PM, Philip Parsons
<<A href="mailto:pparsons@techeez.com">pparsons@techeez.com</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR><BR><BR> No selinux is disabled
and it just started in version
0.98.4<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>--<BR>This message has been scanned
for viruses and dangerous content by<BR>MailScanner, and is believed to be
clean.<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by<BR>MailScanner, and is believed to be
clean.<BR><BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hoople Ltd, Registered in England and Wales
No. 7556595<BR>Registered office: Plough Lane, Hereford, HR4 0LE<BR><BR>"Any
opinion expressed in this e-mail or any attached files are those of
the<BR>individual and not necessarily those of Hoople Ltd. You should be aware
that<BR>Hoople Ltd. monitors its email service. This e-mail and any attached
files<BR>are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee.
This<BR>communication may contain material protected by law from being passed
on. If<BR>you are not the intended recipient and have received this e-mail in
error,<BR>you are advised that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or
copying<BR>of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in<BR>error please contact the sender immediately and destroy all
copies of it."<BR>-- <BR>MailScanner mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info">mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info</A><BR>http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner<BR><BR>Before
posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting<BR><BR>Support MailScanner
development - buy the book off the website! <BR>-- <BR>MailScanner mailing
list<BR>mailscanner@lists.mailscanner.info<BR>http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner<BR><BR>Before
posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting<BR><BR>Support MailScanner
development - buy the book off the website!
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>