on Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 04:09:50PM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [snip] > > You can look into clamAV. > > But if SpamAssassin is too resource intensive I think you will find > > antivirus scanners to be even more so. > > > > I ran Postfix+amavisd-new+clamav on a 133MHz 486 just fine. Adding > SpamAssassin killed it.
Killed it how? Note that under sufficient load, SA can bring down far more powerful systems through resource exhaustion. You'll keep yourself running smoothly if you use your exim, SA, and /etc/security/limits.conf to keep youself under a sane number of concurrencies. SA also tends to run far longer per message when doing remote checks. This isn't a problem in itself, but it leads to resource starvation as multiple instances sit in an iowait state, your queue backs up, and filehandles and memory are exhausted. Properly throttled, SA seems to be highly useful. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? SBC PacBell: The phone is once again your fiend. http://www.consumernet.org/turn/body_pacbell_monopoly.shtml
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
