On 8/19/07 8:22 AM, "Marc Perkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Jo Rhett wrote:
>> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>> OK - it's interesting that of all of you who responded this is the
>>> only person who is doing it right. I have to say that I'm somewhat
>>> surprised that so few people are preprocessing their email to reduce
>>> the SA load. As we all know SA is very processor and memory expensive.
>>>
>>> Personally, I'm filtering 1600 domains and I route less than 1% of
>>> incoming email through SA. SA does do a good job on the remaining 1%
>>> that I can't figure out with blacklists and whitelists and Exim
>>> tricks, but if I ran everything through SA I'd have to have a rack of
>>> dedicated SA servers.
>>
>> I accept that you feel that what are you doing is "right", but I
>> personally find the convenience and power/control of SA to be very
>> useful. I'm routing about 1100 domains with 120k messages per hour on
>> a fairly basic Athlon system no problem, so I'm not quite sure why you
>> find SA to be so intensive.
>>
>> (note that I'm using fairly stock SA with lots of SARE rulesets but no
>> plugins to speak of)
>>
>
> You're doing a LOT better than I am with it. Makes me wonder if I have
> something set up wrong. My main SA server has a fast dual core Athlon
> and 8 gigs of ram and it can get bogged down rather quickly. I wonder if
> I'm doing something wrong ....
>
For what it's worth:
File messages : from Aug 1 00:02:40 to Aug 19 08:29:28
Total number of emails processed by the spam filter : 47950
Number of spams : 43770 ( 91.28%)
Number of clean messages : 4180 ( 8.72%)
Average message analysis time : 4.94 seconds
Average spam analysis time : 4.54 seconds
Average clean message analysis time : 8.75 seconds
Average message score : 19.52
Average spam score : 22.40
Average clean message score : -7.68
Total spam volume : 267 Mbytes
Total clean volume : 87 Mbytes
I've been able to handle a 5 second lagtime on email quite nicely :)
James
