procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: occasional loop

2004-02-03 10:46:11


-----Original Message-----
From: procmail-bounces(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
[mailto:procmail-bounces(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE]On Behalf Of 
Nancy McGough
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 1:07 AM
To: Procmail Mailing List
Subject: Re: occasional loop


On 2 Feb 2004 Bart Schaefer (schaefer(_at_)zanshin(_dot_)com) wrote:
spamc is a pure stdin/stdout filter, it writes no files at all.

The only reason to use a lockfile on it is to prevent too many
connections
to spamd, but spamd has its own flags for limiting the number
of children
it spawns, so procmail locking *shouldn't* be necessary unless the spamd
installation is messed up.

But if someone is running spamassassin (as opposed to spamc),
then they probably *do* want to use a lockfile to limit the
number of instances of spamassassin that are running on their
system. Am I correct about this?


In my experience, generally, yes. I've tried it without the lock and
it seemed easy to get into the state of many cpu bound spamassassin
processes competing for resources. The per-user locks help.

I also add the following to my /etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file (for
those
with admin privileges, in $HOME/.spamassassin/user_prefs otherwise):

# limit RBL checking to max. 5 secs instead of default of 30
rbl_timeout 5

5 secs. may be a little too short, but there are a lot of DNSBL checks, and
this seemed like long enough. On the SA list, there are recs. from time to
time as to which RBL's should be removed from the list because they're
not operational, not reliable, or not working well, but I don't keep track
of those.



_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>