From: "Gary Funck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 2004 February, 26 07:30
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jason Crowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 6:45 AM
> [...]
> >
> > > # Spam Assassiin and other spam filtering
> > > :0fw: spamassassin.lock
> > > | /usr/local/spamassassin/bin/spamassassin
> > >
> > > :0 w: spamassassin.lock
> > > * 10 ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> > > $HOME/Mail/.0-Spam/
> > >
> >
> >
> > I may be wrong but I don't think you need lockfiles on either of these.
> > The first is a filter & you don't have to be worried about something
else
> > writing to it at the same time.
> > The second is a Maildir folder, it saves messages as files so you
> > don't have
> > to worry about something else writing to it.
>
> You're right that you don't need lockfiles on either rule. However, on
> the first rule, where SA is invoked, adding a lockfile is kind of a
> roll-your-own flow control/load management technique. Because SA is cup
> bound and has a fairly large memory footprint, and opens a bunch of files
> and connections, it can overload your system if many SA invocations
> start running at the same time. The lock ensures that there will be only
> on SA run per user at a time. If you can run spamc instead, there is
> much less need for locking because spamd will do the load management.
Just a note, Gary, I found the lock was necessary on the modest 133MHz
penticrash machine I am using for the server. Until I installed the lock
I had spamc routing around spamd and simply delivering emails unchecked.
{^_^}
