On 11/29/07 2:49 PM, "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Even still though, 5 queries times, say, 50ms is a 1/4 of a second that > you're idle in that spamd child process. That leaves you trying to make > up for it by runnning more child processes (you've freed up some CPU > time by having those children idle so you'll have some CPU time to run > more) but you'll never get it all back and you'll be lucky to get even > half of the lost throughput back. > > If you'd like to share a database between distributed MXes/spamd > machines you're best off to use replication and limit autolearning to > the machines that connect to the master database server. Thanks for the details. That gives me an idea what activity to expect. One DB per location may end up being the way to go. How well does it handle concurrency, if it has to update the last access time of tokens and learn new tokens? Are there any numbers on concurrent servers when it starts to bog down? Wes
