I agree.

I would recommend having some "outside" servers that initially take email and do the nasty stuff first.
For example, have at least one+ servers that are configured to accept all email first (via MX records).
Then have those initial server do virus scanning, open relay, other spam checks, and things like spamassasin.
Doing that can reduce your load that finally gets to TMDA by 50% easy.
(Of course the virus scanning and stuff is load intensive but who cares when the pop and smtp stuff from your customers is not hitting that box).

-autocdb is a definite though when the email is relayed from those initial servers to the box with TMDA installed.

Sam



Jason R. Mastaler wrote:
"Monique Y. Herman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

  
Metrics of filtering capabilities among tools that have filtering
capabilities =P
    

I'm not sure.  It's possible that TMDA's content filtering performance
isn't that bad.  This is just not a focus of TMDA so it hasn't been
studied very extensively.  

As far as the FAQ entry and high-volume installations, if another tool
can reduce the number of messages that TMDA sees by handling the
content filtering needs, the overall performance of the system will
improve.  I think that's what I had in mind when I wrote it.
_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users


  

_____________________________________________
tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users

Reply via email to