Andreas Metzler wrote: > Stanislaw Halik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [...] > >>Slightly offtopic: it's bad that no alternative to SA (preferably >>written in C) exists, it seems not to do much more than DNSBL checks, >>MIME decoding, HTML parsing and regexp matching. Even with that, on a >>pretty minimalistic setup, the daemon occupies 110MB of memory. > > > Where do you get the 100M from, how are you measuring it? > cu andreas
FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE, 'top' reports two processes of spamd with a combined memory useage total of 68MB both SIZE and RES. - one or both processes sleeping at 0.00% CPU/WCPU most of the time. - an average single-message shows 0.15% to 0.33% CPU/WCPU briefly. Hardly typical, but we don't care to 'anal yze' spam - simply 'discard' most of it before it ever reaches SA. Last six months, ~ 89% of incoming rejected, ~11% accepted. SA is asked to look at roughly half of the 11%, so NBD if it is no paragon of efficiency. Bill -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
