Kasper Sacharias Eenberg | 1 May 2009 08:16
Picon

Common SQL Backend for several MailScanner clients.

Good morning.

Can you have several MailScanner clients, that all run on a single SQL
Database.
That includes a bayesian filter, but afaik that shouldn't cause any
problems, as it's already shared between users on some servers.

The logging is through SQL ofcourse, as we use the mailwatch front-end.

Will this create any problems that anyone can foresee?

The reasoning behind this would be common logging, so we wouldn't have
to edit several white/blacklists, check several filters for what went
through and so on.

And my boss does not want clustering, as depending on the bandwidth it
uses, we might spread them out over several geographical locations.

Thanks for the great software.
With regards,

________________________________________________________________________

Kasper Eenberg

HOVMARK DATA
Ravnevej 13   
dk-6705 Esbjerg Ø
tlf:   +45 76 12 59 04
mobil: +45 40 70 69 63
(Continue reading)

Johan Hendriks | 1 May 2009 09:07
Picon

RE: FreeBSD port of MailScanner-4.75.11,1 - could someone test

Thanks for this it has been committed today

Because of the long outdates port i started to create my own! Try to see if that worked.
I am no ports guru or Mailscanner guru also.

Thanks again

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info] Namens Kevin Kobb
Verzonden: donderdag 30 april 2009 19:47
Aan: mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
Onderwerp: Re: FreeBSD port of MailScanner-4.75.11,1 - could someone test

Johan Hendriks wrote:
> I created a port for MailScanner-4.75.11,1 on FreeBSD.
> My programming skills are poor, but it al seems to work on my 7.1-stable 
> and 8.0 machine (both AMD64)
> This is with perl 5.10.x , it does not work with perl-5.8.9
> 
> So please test it and let me know if it al works.
> 
>  
> 
> You can download the file here.
> 
> http://www.double-l.nl/mailscanner.tar
> 
>  
> 
(Continue reading)

Nigel Kendrick | 1 May 2009 10:38
Picon

RE: MailScanner slowwing down

>I was looking at those yesterday because I was running the load average up
to 10 or 12 in spurts. My box has a Sempron 2200 and a gig of RAM, so it
does swap when it gets busy. 
>I can upgrade to a machine that's half again faster with twice the memory
for the same monthly fee, but I'd have to run both during the transition and
it would take a ton of 
>time to move everything over. (It's a webserver for a couple of dozen
domains and my secondary name server.)

May not be relevant here, but I had a box that slowed down last week. It was
a P4 3GHz unit with only 768MB RAM and I had just upgraded it to the latest
MailScanner download. I was getting a similar load average and lots of
swapping. First off I noticed that the bitdefender update script was hogging
over half the RAM when it kicked in so I turned it off, but since I was at
the machine anyway, I did a yum update (it's running CentOS4). This updated
quite a lot, but also messed up a MailScanner perl dependency, so I
reinstalled  MailScanner from Julian's script and ever since then the
server's been running fine and still with only 768MB RAM.

Nigel

--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

(Continue reading)

Nigel Kendrick | 1 May 2009 11:09
Picon

RE: Found nn messages in the processing-messages database

Hi,

I'm coming in a bit late here and am trying to catch up on this thread. I
have had a good read but would appreciate some advice
on the following:

On the mail server that ground to a halt on me (frequently) about a week
ago, it's currently showing 384 messages in the processing queue, stretching
back
to 20th April. Here's the top of the list:

Number of messages: 384
Tries   Message Next Try At
=====   ======= ===========
1       762C72F0039.D1D4C       Fri May  1 05:12:13 2009
1       762C72F0039.9458D       Fri May  1 05:10:57 2009
1       762C72F0039.217F1       Fri May  1 05:09:31 2009
1       CA1472F003B.F132E       Fri May  1 04:17:22 2009
1       8511F2F0038.17722       Fri May  1 04:13:59 2009
1       847282F003A.0C804       Fri May  1 04:12:34 2009
1       25C4167800F.C6CF0       Thu Apr 30 19:21:03 2009
1       25C4167800F.AE019       Thu Apr 30 19:19:56 2009
1       25C4167800F.3120B       Thu Apr 30 19:17:54 2009
1       04BE62F003A.1F69E       Thu Apr 30 13:20:46 2009
1       02D6867800F.64CA4       Thu Apr 30 13:18:50 2009
1       02D6867800F.3EF79       Thu Apr 30 13:18:05 2009
1       8628B67800F.1D156       Wed Apr 29 15:23:21 2009
1       D694C678019.51D4F       Wed Apr 29 15:22:41 2009
1       B49BF678017.BC390       Wed Apr 29 15:22:27 2009
1       8628B67800F.5F79F       Wed Apr 29 15:20:27 2009
(Continue reading)

Mail Admin | 1 May 2009 13:53
Picon

RE: MailScanner slowwing down

I’ve managed to reduce the load (fingers crossed), I cant get smf-sav to compile on my box yet, but still looking into it.

I firewalled some brazil IP Ranges which took a good load off too.

Seen some bogus recipient addresses that are really targeted to and rejected them in my access database.

I’m going to try my utmost to get smf-sav working  - would love a sample of someones conf file where they have multiple domains multiple exchange servers for recipient verification

 

 

From: mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info [mailto:mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of G. Armour Van Horn
Sent: 30 April 2009 22:00
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Re: MailScanner slowwing down

 

I was looking at those yesterday because I was running the load average up to 10 or 12 in spurts. My box has a Sempron 2200 and a gig of RAM, so it does swap when it gets busy. I can upgrade to a machine that's half again faster with twice the memory for the same monthly fee, but I'd have to run both during the transition and it would take a ton of time to move everything over. (It's a webserver for a couple of dozen domains and my secondary name server.)

I told Sendmail to stop accepting connections at load average of 6, which kept the load average from trying to get to 50. (Yes, I have seen the la go that high, although not on this system. It ain't pretty!)

I dropped the child count from five to three, which seemed to help - each child just took bigger bites and the throughput didn't seem to be affected.

One thing that looked appealing was setting up a caching nameserver, but all the docs I ran into assumed that you weren't already running BIND on the box and that you wanted to cache your local network, so I was too confused to get that running. (I do have everything installed, just need to figure out the config.)

I did add pause-greet to the Sendmail config, it blocked at least a hundred messages overnight. Not a big change, but the price is right.

I'm thinking about setting up greylisting, it will cut down on the MS load and should spread out the surges a little.

I guess I should have expected things to slow down when I leapfrogged so many versions on Tuesday. Now I've got to figure out how to get it back in control or bite the bullet and get some more horsepower.

Van

Martin Hepworth wrote:

See

 

 

and

 

 

Dropping unknown recipients and having a local caching nameserver are generally the first things to sort, then look at the number of children and batch size...

 

-- 
Martin Hepworth
Oxford, UK

2009/4/30 Mail Admin <mailadmin <at> midland-ics.ie>

Hi All,

 

Recently I am finding that the amount of incoming mail through my MailScanner Server  is really slowing down things.  There is a heavy load now since I took on a domain that seems to me well spammed. Yesterdays processing processed 22,000 emails <at> 88% Spam approx.

Server Spec POWEREDGE 1850 XEON 2.8GHZ/2MB 800FSB – WITH 2 GIG RAM and RAID 1  Configuration on two Disks RPM 10K… Its Running Fedora Core 5, Send Mail 8.13.8-1.fc5 with MailScanner 4.69.7-1 with SA, Razor, DCC., MailWatch V1

Its working very well blocking spam, but only in the last couple of days its got really slow.

Any ideas on how to reduce the load on this server>? By blocking mail at the MTA before it hits MS? OR Tweaking my processes?

What do the Experts think on the Server Spec, for the amount of traffic?

I’d appreciate any help

 

Regards

Kevin

 

This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee(s) and is strictly confidential. The unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, or any information it contains is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and then permanently delete it. Although we make every effort to keep our systems free from viruses, you should check this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses as we cannot accept any liability for viruses inadvertently transmitted by use.


--
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!





--

----------------------------------------------------------

Sign up now for Quotes of the Day, a handful of quotations

on a theme delivered every morning.

Enlightenment! Daily, for free!

mailto:twisted <at> whidbey.com?subject=Subscribe_QOTD

 

For photography, web design, hosting, and maintenance,

visit Van's home page: http://www.domainvanhorn.com/van/

-----------------------------------------------------------

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee(s) and is strictly confidential. The unauthorised use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail, or any information it contains is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately and then permanently delete it. Although we make every effort to keep our systems free from viruses, you should check this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses as we cannot accept any liability for viruses inadvertently transmitted by use.

--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 
Ken A | 1 May 2009 16:48
Favicon

Re: MailScanner slowwing down

Mail Admin wrote:
> I've managed to reduce the load (fingers crossed), I cant get smf-sav to
> compile on my box yet, but still looking into it.
> 
> I firewalled some brazil IP Ranges which took a good load off too.
> 
> Seen some bogus recipient addresses that are really targeted to and rejected
> them in my access database.
> 
> I'm going to try my utmost to get smf-sav working  - would love a sample of
> someones conf file where they have multiple domains multiple exchange
> servers for recipient verification

I don't think smf-sav currently has that ability. You can only define 1 
mailstore in the config.

milter-ahead handles this correctly, of course, by asking sendmail where 
the mail for the domain would go, then using that host to test the 
recipient.  http://www.snertsoft.com/sendmail/milter-ahead/

Ken

> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info
> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of G. Armour
> Van Horn
> Sent: 30 April 2009 22:00
> To: MailScanner discussion
> Subject: Re: MailScanner slowwing down
> 
>  
> 
> I was looking at those yesterday because I was running the load average up
> to 10 or 12 in spurts. My box has a Sempron 2200 and a gig of RAM, so it
> does swap when it gets busy. I can upgrade to a machine that's half again
> faster with twice the memory for the same monthly fee, but I'd have to run
> both during the transition and it would take a ton of time to move
> everything over. (It's a webserver for a couple of dozen domains and my
> secondary name server.)
> 
> I told Sendmail to stop accepting connections at load average of 6, which
> kept the load average from trying to get to 50. (Yes, I have seen the la go
> that high, although not on this system. It ain't pretty!)
> 
> I dropped the child count from five to three, which seemed to help - each
> child just took bigger bites and the throughput didn't seem to be affected.
> 
> One thing that looked appealing was setting up a caching nameserver, but all
> the docs I ran into assumed that you weren't already running BIND on the box
> and that you wanted to cache your local network, so I was too confused to
> get that running. (I do have everything installed, just need to figure out
> the config.)
> 
> I did add pause-greet to the Sendmail config, it blocked at least a hundred
> messages overnight. Not a big change, but the price is right.
> 
> I'm thinking about setting up greylisting, it will cut down on the MS load
> and should spread out the surges a little.
> 
> I guess I should have expected things to slow down when I leapfrogged so
> many versions on Tuesday. Now I've got to figure out how to get it back in
> control or bite the bullet and get some more horsepower.
> 
> Van
> 
> Martin Hepworth wrote: 
> 
> See 
> 
>  
> 
> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=maq:index#optimization_tips
> 
>  
> 
> and
> 
>  
> 
> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=maq:index#getting_the_best_out_of_s
> pamassassin
> 
>  
> 
> Dropping unknown recipients and having a local caching nameserver are
> generally the first things to sort, then look at the number of children and
> batch size...
> 
>  
> 
> 

-- 
Ken Anderson
Pacific Internet - http://www.pacific.net
--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

Chris Stone | 1 May 2009 17:09
Picon

Re: MailScanner slowwing down

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Ken A <ka <at> pacific.net> wrote:
>> I'm going to try my utmost to get smf-sav working  - would love a sample
>> of
>> someones conf file where they have multiple domains multiple exchange
>> servers for recipient verification
>
> I don't think smf-sav currently has that ability. You can only define 1
> mailstore in the config.

I'm not currently using smf-sav, but I did do some testing with it and
I believe it does use mailertable to find out the server for the
recipient validation checks. According to their site: "Sendmail
virtusertable and mailertable features full support.".....

Chris
--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

Julian Field | 1 May 2009 17:21
Picon
Favicon

Re: Found nn messages in the processing-messages database


On 01/05/2009 10:09, Nigel Kendrick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm coming in a bit late here and am trying to catch up on this thread. I
> have had a good read but would appreciate some advice
> on the following:
>
> On the mail server that ground to a halt on me (frequently) about a week
> ago, it's currently showing 384 messages in the processing queue, stretching
> back
> to 20th April. Here's the top of the list:
>
> Number of messages: 384
> Tries   Message Next Try At
> =====   ======= ===========
> 1       762C72F0039.D1D4C       Fri May  1 05:12:13 2009
> 1       762C72F0039.9458D       Fri May  1 05:10:57 2009
> 1       762C72F0039.217F1       Fri May  1 05:09:31 2009
> 1       CA1472F003B.F132E       Fri May  1 04:17:22 2009
> 1       8511F2F0038.17722       Fri May  1 04:13:59 2009
> 1       847282F003A.0C804       Fri May  1 04:12:34 2009
> 1       25C4167800F.C6CF0       Thu Apr 30 19:21:03 2009
> 1       25C4167800F.AE019       Thu Apr 30 19:19:56 2009
> 1       25C4167800F.3120B       Thu Apr 30 19:17:54 2009
> 1       04BE62F003A.1F69E       Thu Apr 30 13:20:46 2009
> 1       02D6867800F.64CA4       Thu Apr 30 13:18:50 2009
> 1       02D6867800F.3EF79       Thu Apr 30 13:18:05 2009
> 1       8628B67800F.1D156       Wed Apr 29 15:23:21 2009
> 1       D694C678019.51D4F       Wed Apr 29 15:22:41 2009
> 1       B49BF678017.BC390       Wed Apr 29 15:22:27 2009
> 1       8628B67800F.5F79F       Wed Apr 29 15:20:27 2009
> 1       3DDF567800F.D497F       Wed Apr 29 13:41:58 2009
> 1       29634678033.E00D4       Wed Apr 29 13:39:45 2009
> 1       E1CB367801A.10092       Wed Apr 29 13:39:16 2009
> 1       AAFCC67802C.D024A       Wed Apr 29 13:38:52 2009
> 1       0B532678019.78254       Wed Apr 29 13:37:36 2009
> 1       6244F67800F.34B35       Wed Apr 29 11:18:31 2009
> 1       6244F67800F.0537D       Wed Apr 29 11:18:19 2009
> 1       6244F67800F.A73C3       Wed Apr 29 11:17:11 2009
>
> Are these entries now considered 'spurious' and do I need to take any
> action, wait for the current MailScanner beta release to go stable or even
> install it now?
It already is a stable release. I just haven't had time to announce it 
yet, sorry, that's tomorrow's job.
Install the stable release, stop MailScanner, destroy 
/var/spool/MailScanner/incoming/*db and fire it up again.

Jules

-- 
Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
www.MailScanner.info
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store

Need help customising MailScanner?
Contact me!
Need help fixing or optimising your systems?
Contact me!
Need help getting you started solving new requirements from your boss?
Contact me!

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
Follow me at twitter.com/JulesFM and twitter.com/MailScanner

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

Ken A | 1 May 2009 17:26
Favicon

Re: MailScanner slowwing down

Chris Stone wrote:
> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Ken A <ka <at> pacific.net> wrote:
>>> I'm going to try my utmost to get smf-sav working  - would love a sample
>>> of
>>> someones conf file where they have multiple domains multiple exchange
>>> servers for recipient verification
>> I don't think smf-sav currently has that ability. You can only define 1
>> mailstore in the config.
> 
> I'm not currently using smf-sav, but I did do some testing with it and
> I believe it does use mailertable to find out the server for the
> recipient validation checks. According to their site: "Sendmail
> virtusertable and mailertable features full support.".....
> 
> 

You are correct. It does use mailertable entries, so that is all that's 
needed to route mail to several exchange boxes. Just tested here, and it 
works as advertised.
Ken

> 
> Chris

-- 
Ken Anderson
Pacific Internet - http://www.pacific.net
--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

Nigel Kendrick | 1 May 2009 17:35
Picon

RE: Found nn messages in the processing-messages database


-----Original Message-----
From: mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info
[mailto:mailscanner-bounces <at> lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf Of Julian
Field
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 4:21 PM
To: MailScanner discussion
Subject: Re: Found nn messages in the processing-messages database

On 01/05/2009 10:09, Nigel Kendrick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm coming in a bit late here and am trying to catch up on this thread. I
> have had a good read but would appreciate some advice

[Snip]

It already is a stable release. I just haven't had time to announce it 
yet, sorry, that's tomorrow's job.
Install the stable release, stop MailScanner, destroy 
/var/spool/MailScanner/incoming/*db and fire it up again.

Jules

Thanks Jules,

I think you deserve some time off - take it easy!

Nigel

--

-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner <at> lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 


Gmane