On Thursday 17 August 2006 13:41, Alex Bramley wrote with regard to - Re: Using a ramdisk : > Hi Bjorn, > > Bjorn Jensen wrote: > > Ramprasad wrote: > >> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 10:27 +0200, Bjorn Jensen wrote: > >>> Can spamassassin benefit in any way from a ramdisk ? > >>> The server we have for spamassassin, has 3 gigs of ram, and spamd > >>> doesn't even use 1 gig of that, so I thought perhaps it would speed > >>> things up if I could place something on a ramdisk. But this leads to > >>> the question, does spamassassin do any disk intensive things ? > >>> I'm running that gocr image scanning as well, could this benefit from > >>> it, or is it the network lookups that are the slow part in any case ? > >>> Currently a mail is processed in about 1.5 - 6 seconds > >>> > >>> regards, > >>> Bjorn Jensen > >> > >> Can you get your MTA to write in the ramdisk while it is queing/scanning > >> the mail. That is where you will get most of your speed. But this may > >> not be a safe option always. > >> Typically using scanners like Mailscanner , you could do the actual Mail > >> scanning when the mail is on the ramdisk. That gives you good > >> performance benefit. http://www.mailscanner.info/serve/cache/120.html > > > > I appreciate the response on this topic, however I was merely interested > > in the spamassassin aspect of this, and if I could gain a benefit there, > > and I'm not interested in any mailserver options at the moment. > > > > But once again, thanks for taking the time to reply. > > > > Regards, > > Bjorn Jensen > > I realise this thread is a week old now, but I thought you might be > interested to know that we cut disk access by nearly 60% on a set of six > mailservers by moving the Bayes and auto-whitelist berkeley databases to > a ramdisk. I'm not sure whether you will be able to achieve a similar > speed-up (the databases used to be on a RAID-5 filesystem in our case, > so small writes such as database updates required reads from all other > disks in the RAID), but there are some definite benefits to be gained > from doing this. Of course, if you're using an SQL database as your > bayes store, this is irrelevant. > > Cheers, > --alex
Just been thinking about this a little bit... If I am not mistaken the BayesDB is db3? Can it not be compiled against DB4, then you can set the memory cache in a DB_CONFIG file. This way you get the performance of a ramdisk, but do not run the risk of losing the DB... just my $0.02... -- Regards, Scott Ryan ISP Systems Development & Integration Specialist Telkom Internet ------------------------------------- Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience usually comes from bad judgement. -------------------------------------
