[Mimedefang] poor performence from SA
Kris Deugau
kdeugau at vianet.ca
Thu Jan 12 10:41:27 EST 2006
Kenneth Porter wrote:
> A spam filter, like an anti virus, must be constantly updated to match
> the spam that comes in. It's not something you install and forget about.
> I'd recommend updating SA to 3.1.0 to get better results.
FWIW, I'm still happily using SA 2.64 on three systems for two reasons:
1) Spam detection rates are still very good. (~98%+ at a loose
off-the-cuff guesstimate)
2) The system load for SA3.x is unacceptable on at least two of the
three systems.
(The systems are: my own personal server, with per-user almost
everything; the legacy spam filter server, with per-user AWL and
white/blacklists with global Bayes; and the legacy domain hosting
server with global everything called from MIMEDefang.)
All three have had the SpamCop URIRBL patch added for URIRBL support,
which is probably a big part of why all three systems are running well
and catching spam.
All three receive fairly regular hand-verified Bayes training (mostly on
FNs).
In a few rare cases where a persistent spam run simply will NOT go away,
I'll manually analyze a set of spams and tweak, modify, or add a rule.
I haven't made use of third-party rulesets because of the memory and CPU
limits on the servers at work.
That said, there *is* IIRC a known DoS flaw in SA 3.0.3; upgrade to
3.0.4 at least.
-kgd
More information about the MIMEDefang
mailing list