-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 27/01/2010 18:04, Stevan Bajić wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:32:18 +0100 "[email protected]"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> no problem, i will be pleased to give some feedback. Actually i'm
>> running a french email service provider company and all ours
>> filtering servers working with dspam.
>>
>> Migration to 3.9.0 was very easy and no problem was reported.
>>
> Phuu... that was important to me personally that the update is
> easy.
>
>
>> We've see many improvements in processing speed, that is very
>> important to us.
>>
> For us too :)
>
>
>> Our filtering setup using: amavisd 2.6.4 clamav with extra sig SA
>> 330 Dspam 3.9.0 CRM114
>>
>> if CRM114 rely on a SA plugin to work and report result, SA and
>> DSPAM are natively called by amavisd. Until last week, DSPAM was
>> called in command line mode (amavisd default setup), but now
>> we're using daemon mode. so amavisd setup is now the following:
>>
>> @spam_scanners = ( ['SpamAssassin',
>> 'Amavis::SpamControl::SpamAssassin'], ['DSPAM',
>> 'Amavis::SpamControl::ExtProg', $dspam, [ qw(--client --stdout
>> --process --deliver=innocent,spam --user), $daemon_user ],
>> score_factor => 1, ], );
>>
>> We have not yet see a great improvement in speed or mysql load,
>> but i think it's better this way.
>>
> Speed should be slightly better when using daemon mode. You could
> patch Amavisd-New to use dspamc instead of dspam binary. Then you
> would probably see an additional speed imporvement. But not ultra
> spectacular. Just a bunch of seconds less per day used when calling
> DSPAM.
>
>
i would give it a try
>> With this setting we can generate dspam signature, so we can
>> easily retrain on false positive (cron script)
>>
>> The only problem is that we are not able yet to autolearn on
>> mistake, like CRM114 can do as a SA plugin, according to total
>> score.
>>
> Aha. To get thet you would need to add DSPAM as an SA plugin.
> CRM114 is AFAIK directly integrated into SA. Right? And DSPAM you
> call from within Amavisd-New. Right?

indeed
i use this SA plugin for CRM114:
http://mschuette.name/files/crm114-0.8.0-sa33.pm.
Did a DSPAM plugin will be ok for performance or it's a bad choice ?

> What CRM114 setup do you have? What classifier? I assume you use
> OSB Winnow? With unique microgrooming or just microgrooming or
> plain OSB? What SPAM/HAM threshold do you use? Do you use a
> symetric or asymetric threshold? Do you call directly CRM114 or do
> you use mailreaver or mailfilter or any other CRM114 script? Which
> one?
>
>
CRM114: version 20090807-BlameThorstenAndJenny (TRE 0.7.6 (BSD))

the SA plugin call CRM114 like this:
/usr/bin/crm -u /var/amavis/.crm114 mailreaver.crm

to be honest, i've used the default settings for crm114 so:
:clf: /osb unique microgroom/
:good_threshold: /10.0/
:spam_threshold: /-5.0/

for threshold, i suppose SA plugin change crm114 default settings with
these: (into crm114.cf)
crm114_staticscore_good      -1.0
crm114_staticscore_prob_good -0.5
crm114_staticscore_unsure     0.0
crm114_staticscore_prob_spam  0.5
crm114_staticscore_spam       3.0

# custom crm114 thresholds
# default values are +/- 10
crm114_good_threshold 5
crm114_spam_threshold -5

the only problem with CRM114 is that css files are local on file
system, so we cant share between multiple servers like mysql backend
in SA or DSPAM.
>> Our most busy filtering server actually manage around 80 000
>> emails per day (effectively processed into amavisd), the others
>> are closed in volume. Average scan timing are around 800 ms on a
>> Intel Bi Xeon E5530, 24 GB RAM, SAS disks. SA takes around 80-90%
>> of this time.
>>
> It is no surprise that SA is using the bigger part of the
> processing time.
>
>
>> DSPAM is the fastest with an average scanning time of 60 ms !
>>
> :) For DSPAM I usually messure how many mails per second DSPAM can
> process and for SA I messure how many seconds per mail SA needs.
> Huge difference IMHO.
>
>
>> Load average is around 0.4
>>
>> 2 SQL servers (Master/Master) are external to filtering server. 7
>> filtering servers (with dspam) are connected to these sql
>> server. We've have no replication problem at all with dspam even
>> in master/master.
>>
> I have the same. So far no issues except that I need to take care
> where to run the purge script since both masters should not do the
> purging at the same time. The new purge script does proper locking
> so even if you would run the purgin on both masters, only one will
> purge a table at the same time.
>
>
>> Voila ! Thanks for all the works !
>>
> Thanks for the verbose feedback.
>
>
you're welcome
>> Regards Tonio
>>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAktgeu0ACgkQ8FtMlUNHQIMoKACfQow7fzGtlyxXuE0XTOryWjiP
iRwAn1c0eMcv/zChVgxC/vRO0Dvbq3PM
=Yjos
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
Dspam-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user

Reply via email to