I would run a tcpdump on the ethernet interface while doing this, just in case there are network tests happening that you are not aware of.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:55:21PM -0700, poifgh wrote: > > Hi > > I was measuring how quickly could SA [spam assassin] process spams when > several SA processes are run in parallel over separate mbox files. I used a > 8 core machine. Below are the numbers when I forked different number of > processes. > > Fork = 8; > Rate = 57 msgs/sec > > Fork = 4; > Rate = 44 msgs/sec > > Fork = 1; > Rate = 22 msgs/sec > > > I ran freshly build SA with Bayes and DNSBL turned off. Why am I not seeing > a linear increase in the throughput? Is a file locking creating the > bottleneck? If yes, which particular file is being locked? If no, what could > be the reason for this? > > thnx > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Parallelizing-Spam-Assassin-tp24751958p24751958.html > Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- /* Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL KB1IOJ | Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Maine http://www.midcoast.com/ */
