It takes roughly about a third the time. On the same longish spam
message "spamassassin <rendy" takes 6.0 seconds while "spamc <rendy"
takes 2.2 seconds. The former varies from 5.5 to 8.2 seconds on three
runs. The latter is within a couple percent of 2.2 seconds each time.
Note that you are using 3.0.4 so if you are using per user rules and
any of the user rules involve things like full body rules spamd will
hit a perl bug from time to time and not mark a score for the spam.
I built a little procmail rule to detect this case and rerun the spam
through spamassassin rather than spamc. It happens so infrequently
that this is a minor time cost on the system. But it's a major
annoyance reduction.
{^_^}
----- Original Message -----
From: "shane mullins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <users@spamassassin.apache.org>
Sent: 2005 October, 11, Tuesday 08:17
Subject: Spamassassin vs spamd
Is anyone here running spamd? We use Spamassassin 3.0.4 and several SARE
rules. Now that our primary MX server handles about 20k emails a day, cpu
usage stays over 90 % and load average is between 5 and 6. I was wondering
how much faster spamd is?
Thanks
Shane
