[Mimedefang] Greylisting Code on Wiki

Andy Lyttle mimedefang at phroggy.com
Wed Dec 12 12:06:28 EST 2007

> Anyone else using spamc and have any information to report?  Since  
> I use spamc/spamd on the same box, this seems like a no-brainer to  
> implement but perhaps someone has a field-tested warning?

I'm not using spamd, but I was interested in this possibility,  
because I thought it might help with resource utilization on a box  
with inadequate hardware, such as mine. ;-)  I've got four MD child  
processes, which means four instances of SpamAssassin loaded in RAM,  
and four instances of every single SA rule (including all the ones  
from SARE and the custom rules I've written myself) all loaded in  
RAM.  Each MD child process takes something like 30 seconds to load -  
which is why I have four of them, so when new mail comes in, there's  
an idle daemon who can handle it, because if I had to spawn a new  
one, it would take long enough it might tempfail.

So I was thinking, if I used spamd, there would be only one copy of  
all the SA stuff loaded into RAM, keeping four MD children running  
wouldn't eat as much RAM, and new MD children could spawn very  
quickly.  But, then I'd have to learn how to configure spamd, and I'm  

Does my line of thinking sound reasonable here?  Have I jumped to any  
wrong conclusions?

~ Andy

More information about the MIMEDefang mailing list