headers
Roberto Fulgado | 1 May 2010 01:06
Favicon

Re: 'not spam (whitelisted)' in the headers

Le 2010-04-22 11:28, Thomas Lohman a écrit :
 >> >> Denis
 >> >>
 >> >> That probably was the case so I edited the last line of
 >> >> spam.blacklist.rules file:
 >> >>
 >> >> FromOrTo: default no
 >> >> to
 >> >> FromOrTo: default yes
 >> >>
 >> >> Thank you very much,
 >> >> Roberto
 > >
 > > Roberto, unless I'm missing something on how you're using this file,
 > > if you change the last line to "default yes" then Mailscanner is going
 > > to mark all mail as blacklisted since that is telling it that that is
 > > the default.
 > >
 > > cheers,
 > >
 > >
 > > --tom

 >Tom is probably right! We have:
 >.Fromorto default no
 >in that file.
 >
 >Denis

I already removed that file and made changes to The MailScanner.conf
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joost Waversveld | 4 May 2010 17:55
Picon

Re: OT: Julian

Julian,

First of all, your health is much more important than this. I hope you 
are doing well.

I send you this email because I think the mailing lists of mailscanner 
are offline.

The last message I received are from april 29th. If I try to send an 
message to the list, I see an time out in my mailserver log on 
safir.blacknight.ie. The archives are also offline, see for example 
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner-announce

Julian, I have to repeat myself, your health is much more important then 
this. All the best for you!

Best regards,

Joost Waversveld

On 22-4-2010 15:36, Julian Field wrote:
> I'm still here folks. Just haven't been around for a long time. Work 
> has been very busy and I'm starting to get a sinking feeling about my 
> health position; something is wrong, just don't know what yet. I need 
> to summon up the courage to go back to the docs and let them start 
> prodding and poking again :-(
>
> Anything important or urgent, send to MailScanner <at> ecs.soton.ac.uk and 
> I'll try to monitor that as much as I can.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joost Waversveld | 4 May 2010 17:39
Picon

Test message

Will this message reach the mailing list?

Sorry for the inconvenienve everybody...

Best regards,

Joost waversveld
--

-- 
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!
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Julian Field | 5 May 2010 13:00
Picon
Favicon

List server was down

If you've been wondering why things had gone so quiet, the list server 
was unfortunately down for a bit.
Hopefully we won't have lost many posts, they should be still sitting in 
most people's outgoing queues.

Thanks for Blacknight for the speedy response once I raised the issue!

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.

--

--
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Zaeem Arshad | 4 May 2010 18:44
Picon

Extracting those last drops of performance

Hi List,

My MailScanner+Postfix rejects roughly 8 million spam messages a day
on MTA level while around 1.2 million are passed on to MailScanner for
scanning. The system is a dual quad core 2.5 GHz system with 24 GB RAM
today. At times, MailScanner is unable to keep up with the number of
spam messages that escape the MTA checks and are submitted to
MailScanner causing huge delays. I am just wondering if tweaking the
following settings can get me improved performance.

Max Children = 40
Max Unscanned Bytes Per Scan = 100m
Max Unsafe Bytes Per Scan = 50m
Max Unscanned Messages Per Scan = 50
Max Unsafe Messages Per Scan = 50
Max Normal Queue Size = 70000

I am using caching dns, ram disk for processing, clamd, compiled
spamassassin rules and optimized scheduler and filesystems in this
server. Any ideas on how I can tweak the above settings to gain more
MailScanner performance?

Regards

--
Zaeem
--

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

Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
The Doctor | 4 May 2010 08:26
Picon
Picon
Favicon

MAilScanner and Exim 4.71

Jules any isues with MailScanner 4.79 or 4.80 and Exim?

I have tried both options and the data for the exim.in spool never
gets passed to the exim spool.

-- 
Member - Liberal International	This is doctor <at> nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor <at> nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Never Satan President Republic! Beware AntiChrist rising! 
http://twitter.com/rootnl2k http://www.facebook.com/dyadallee
UK Time for a Common Sense change vote Liberal Democrat / Alliance 

-- 
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!
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Randal, Phil | 5 May 2010 13:44
Picon

RE: Extracting those last drops of performance

Does vmstat show any swapping going on?  If so, reduce the number of
children.

You might wish to play with the 

  Max SpamAssassin Size

setting, too.

Cheers,

Phil
--
Phil Randal | Networks Engineer
NHS Herefordshire & Herefordshire Council  | Deputy Chief Executive's
Office | I.C.T. Services Division
Thorn Office Centre, Rotherwas, Hereford, HR2 6JT
Tel: 01432 260160
email: prandal <at> herefordshire.gov.uk

Any opinion expressed in this e-mail or any attached files are those of
the individual and not necessarily those of Herefordshire Council.

This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely
for the use of the addressee. This communication may contain material
protected by law from being passed on. If you are not the intended
recipient and have received this e-mail in error, you are advised that
any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please
contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of it.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Steve Freegard | 5 May 2010 14:10

Re: Extracting those last drops of performance

On 04/05/10 17:44, Zaeem Arshad wrote:
> I am using caching dns, ram disk for processing, clamd, compiled
> spamassassin rules and optimized scheduler and filesystems in this
> server. Any ideas on how I can tweak the above settings to gain more
> MailScanner performance?

Set 'Log Speed = yes' in MailScanner.conf; then plot the average time 
spent per message.  This is the key metric when tuning; it should be < 
10 seconds and preferably 2-3 secs.

That's the most important thing to do *first*.  That way you can measure 
the difference once any tuning has been done.

By far the most heavyweight process is going to be SpamAssassin - so 
that's most likely the area you are going to need to focus on.  Are you 
using Bayes?  If so - using which storage method?

Regards,
Steve.
--

-- 
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!
Permalink | Reply | 9 comments |
headers
Martin Hepworth | 5 May 2010 15:44
Picon

Re: Extracting those last drops of performance



On 5 May 2010 13:10, Steve Freegard <steve.freegard <at> fsl.com> wrote:
On 04/05/10 17:44, Zaeem Arshad wrote:
I am using caching dns, ram disk for processing, clamd, compiled
spamassassin rules and optimized scheduler and filesystems in this
server. Any ideas on how I can tweak the above settings to gain more
MailScanner performance?

Set 'Log Speed = yes' in MailScanner.conf; then plot the average time spent per message.  This is the key metric when tuning; it should be < 10 seconds and preferably 2-3 secs.

That's the most important thing to do *first*.  That way you can measure the difference once any tuning has been done.

By far the most heavyweight process is going to be SpamAssassin - so that's most likely the area you are going to need to focus on.  Are you using Bayes?  If so - using which storage method?

Regards,
Steve.

--
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!

Also have a look at the "getting the most out of spamassassin" and the performance tuning (just above the getting the most on the same page). It's a little dated but does give some pointers to get you started.

makeing sure you're only hitting RBLS you have local zone transfers for etc will help alot if you've not already done that.

--
Martin Hepworth
Oxford, UK
--

-- 
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!
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Zaeem Arshad | 5 May 2010 19:47
Picon

Re: Extracting those last drops of performance

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Randal, Phil
<prandal <at> herefordshire.gov.uk> wrote:
> Does vmstat show any swapping going on?  If so, reduce the number of
> children.
>

Nopes none.

> You might wish to play with the
>
>  Max SpamAssassin Size

Max SpamAssassin Size = 200k

Should I look into changing that?

--
Zaeem
--

-- 
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!
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane