Peter Kirk wrote: >> Do you use 'require verify = recipient' >> *snip*
> Hey Bill > > Thanks for the info, we do, do all of the above such as blacklisting, > whitelisting, dnslists, 'require verify = recipient', clamav and the > rest of the works. Make sure that spamassassin gets the last bit of > work there is to do. > > The thing is that it works fine for about 3months and then just goes > crazy and uses a lot of cpu "well perl does". In the past I always end > up fixing it by either rebooting or updating all the packages on the > server. Though im sure there must be something causing this? > OK - the next place I would look is that an upgrade has altered your original SA prefs - if not the whole bleeping environment and mindset of SA. The last few have had warnings that init.pre had changed and called for a review, and (briefly) my last few *new* installs had far higher workload than previous ones until smacked back into simplicity-modes. > The server has 1GB mem and 1cpu 2.6... running on vmware, with a big > pipe to the internet. So there should be no bottlenecks. Server > handles anything from about 10-30k incoming mails per day, and blocks > about 20-50k spam a day so its not that much under strain. > > Thanks > > > That is a suspiciously low percentage of spam to ham, IMNSHO. Over six+ years, we see closer to 80% spam, 20% ham. And even that is after early-rejections that are excluded from the ratio. OTOH, the principle <domain>.<tld>'s are in use for a dozen-plus years, on the same IP for six+, and widely harvested, so may be higher than average spam-magnets. Regards, Bill -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
