On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 08:10 +0100, Roger Grosswiler wrote: > > Am Mi, den 02.03.2005 schrieb Roger Grosswiler um 21:14: > > > >> so, i do my very best to answer all your questions: > >> > >> 1) i don't use clam, i use antivir (h+b edv) > > > > Yes, I did understand that from your first posting. I don't think > > antivir is a problem. > There was another posting assuming that i use clam ;-) > > > >> 2) the machine is a old p3/866 mhz with 128 mb ram only, running fc3 (a > >> granny machine...) > > > > Low on RAM, but CPU power is enough for what you run and the amount of > > mail. > yeah, but this thing runs also mysql, apache, postgre.... > > > >> 3) mail quantity is about 300-400 per day. Average use is according to > >> tload between 0.90 and 3.50 (peaks) avg about 1.3 *ouch* > > > > So Ø 1 mail each 2 minutes. That is not much. Can you say how long a > > mail needs from initial connect by the foreign MTA up to the final > > storage? > > it takes up to 2 minutes, if 2 mail come at the same time up to 5. > > > >> 4) spamassassin is running as daemon (3 childprocesses) > >> 5) amavisd-new is running as dameon (3 childprocesses) > > > > Is fine I think. Did you import a lot of custom rulesets into > > SpamAssassin additional to those coming with the package (keyword: rules > > du jour)? Do you use RBL checks with SpamAssassin and other external > > checks? > > > external checks are already done by postfix, including extension-checking, rbl (no dul, i am dial-up mysqlf ;-)), very > low-end conf-file for amavis... > > by the other hand, i have a thread running /dev/sda slowly dieing....perhaps, this influes "speed" too... > --- we just recently concluded a two week discussion about implementing greylisting which greatly reduces the load of spamassassin since not much get's through...you should consider implementing it - see the archives for the month of February Craig
