From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 7 16:57:17 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C1C937B401 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 16:57:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.au.itouchnet.net (nat2.au.itouchnet.net [144.135.23.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9BEB43F75 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 16:57:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ajthomson@optushome.com.au) Received: from nobody by mx1.au.itouchnet.net with scanned_ok (Exim 3.36 #1) id 19Zfr8-000P5g-00 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:57:14 +1000 Received: from athomson.prv.au.itouchnet.net ([192.168.13.55]) by mx1.au.itouchnet.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 19Zfr8-000P5Z-00 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:57:14 +1000 From: Andrew Thomson To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20030707233726.GA74181@wopr.caltech.edu> References: <1057619317.52026.28.camel@athomson.prv.au.itouchnet.net> <20030707233726.GA74181@wopr.caltech.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1057622233.52026.38.camel@athomson.prv.au.itouchnet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 Date: 08 Jul 2003 09:57:14 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Checked: Scanned for any viruses and unauthorized attachments at mx1.au.itouchnet.net X-iScan-ID: 96448-1057622234-67784@mx1.au.itouchnet.net version $Name: REL_2_0_2 $ Subject: Re: spamassassin slow to process messages X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 23:57:17 -0000 On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 09:37, Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 09:08:37AM +1000, Andrew Thomson wrote: > > > I've got a CPU: Pentium III/Pentium III Xeon/Celeron (930.32-MHz > > 686-class CPU) and I'm seeing performance like, > > > > Jul 8 08:25:11 athomson spamd[52016]: clean message (0.4/5.0) for > > ajt:1001 in 10.2 seconds, 2132 bytes. > > Well, that's pretty bad. I see: > > Jul 7 04:05:49 wopr spamd[66708]: identified spam (8.4/5.0) for mph:501 in 4.0 seconds, 1206 bytes. > Jul 7 04:08:18 wopr spamd[66726]: clean message (-5.3/5.0) for mph:501 in 7.1 seconds, 2553 bytes. > > This is on a Cyrix 6x86 (166 MHz 486-class CPU) with no L2 cache. :-) > > Is the machine heavily loaded with other work? Assuming that there are > no messages between the ones you posted, it doesn't look like the machine > is overburdened by mail alone. we're back in business... Jul 8 09:50:11 athomson spamd[52899]: clean message (0.4/5.0) for ajt:1001 in 10.2 seconds, 3044 bytes. Jul 8 09:50:28 athomson spamd[52912]: clean message (0.4/5.0) for ajt:1001 in 10.3 seconds, 5840 bytes. Jul 8 09:54:35 athomson spamd[52952]: clean message (0.4/5.0) for ajt:1001 in 0.3 seconds, 3027 bytes. Jul 8 09:54:43 athomson spamd[52965]: clean message (1.3/5.0) for ajt:1001 in 0.4 seconds, 8524 bytes. put use_razor1 0 use_razor2 0 in my local config and now it goes real fast!! thanks for the tips.. so what is this razor business anyway?? ajt.