I read through the posts, and I don't think they are vaild.  When run as
Spamd spamassassin on my machine uses about 50 meg per child.  I think this
is a configuration issue for the person in question.

The questions I would have for them are:
1. What rules are you running?  
2. Are you running the V3 version of said rules?
3. Are you taking advantage of the myriad of new features in V3 that make
some of the rules for 2.x.x unnecessary?

Ron

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Duncan Findlay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:15:34 -0400
To: [email protected]
Subject: Spamd is a memory hog (?)


There's a big long thread on debian-devel about trying to get
SpamAssassin 3.0.0 into sarge (which is not going to happen,
FWIW).

There's a lot of grumbling about our API change without bumping the
soname (which of course doesn't exist in perl...). People think we
should have provided backward compatibility, somehow. There's even
some absurd claims that spamassassin 3 breaks exim 4.

However, among the topics discussed include a large number of
developers claiming that SpamAssassin essentially crashed their system
by using up way too much memory. jm, quinlan, I suspect you may be
interested in these reports. I've linked them below:

Beginning of thread
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/10/msg00213.html

Tollef Fog Heen reports some pretty hefty memory usage here:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/10/msg00242.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/10/msg00302.html

The thread's pretty much dead, but if we could gain anything from it,
that'd be good.

-- 
Duncan Findlay


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .


Reply via email to