[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