On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 00:52:58 -0700, "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From: "James Lay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 20:46:05 -0700
>> "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> From: "James Lay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>> > Hey all!
>>> >
>>> > Anyone happen to know the memory requirements of SpamAssassin? I
>>> > have 3.0.4 running on 128 Megs ok....will upgrading to 3.1.4 plus
>>> > the SARE rules tank it? Or am I safe? Thanks all!
>>>
>>> Perhaps.
>>>
>>> Do not run anything else with a significant memory footprint on the
>>> system at the same time. Do not use X, of course. Minimize the number
>>> of children spawned to one.
>>>
>>> {^_^} Joanne
>>>
>>
>> Thank you Joanne :)
>
>(I used to run SA on a 256 meg 66 MHz Pentium that was also the firewall.
>It was erm ahm slow, VERY slow. But it ran. This was in the 2.6.3 days
>give or take some.)
>
>{^_-}
The largest factor to take into consideration is how much mail SA will
be dealing with. Running a single child will be limiting, if you are
getting anything more than a few hundred mails per day that hardware
will be insufficient. You will either hit long delays or mail will be
passed through without being scanned.
Just my 2p worth
KR
Nigel
