[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: high cpu utilization with spamass-milter 0.2.0?

From: Dan Nelson
Subject: Re: high cpu utilization with spamass-milter 0.2.0?
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:41:07 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

In the last episode (Jul 28), Changeling said:
> Measuring over a 15 minute interval, using 0.1.3a spamd averages
> about 0.96 seconds (max time was 3.7 seconds) while using 0.2.0 spamd
> averages about 5.26 seconds (max time was 34.86).  Spamass-milter

You might see a slightly longer runtime because 0.2.0 generates a bunch
of headers to mimic what sendmail would add, including a Received:
header containing the originating IP number and date, and
X-Envelope-From: header.  The IP number lets spamassassin do dnsbl
checks, so that could affect processing speed.  Try timing the two
versions after restarting spamd with the -L option (which disables DNS

> doesn't seem to take any more or less time either way.  When stracing
> I didn't see anything out of the ordinary except that it seemed that
> when several emails came in in a row sometimes spamd would spin a
> while trying to get a lock on the auto-whitelist file.  This caused
> several spamd processes to queue up waiting to access the file.  I
> turned off auto-whitelisting for spamd and now spamd runs as quickly
> with 0.2.0 as it does with 0.1.3a.  However two things still concern
> me: 1. It almost sounds like the problem is with SpamAssassin, but
> why didnt this problem show up until I upgraded to 0.2.0 and why does
> it immediately go away when downgrading to 0.1.3a?  2. Spamd with
> auto-whitelisting running with 0.1.3a runs as quickly as spamd
> without auto-whitelisting running with 0.2.0?
>  It seems almost like spamass-milter is responsible somehow for the
> consumption of the extra resources that are made available once
> auto-whitelisting is turned off.

Do you know if auto-whitelist works based on header From, or envelope
MAIL FROM?  If the latter, then with 0.1.3a spamassassinmay not have
been whitelisting at all, because it didn't know the envelope sender.

        Dan Nelson

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]