4. Compare the times.
I just did this, on a lightly loaded, P4 running at 2Ghz:
% wc msg.txt
1010 9729 63861 msg.txt
With spamassassin:
% time procmail < msg.txt
User=79.360 System=0.330 Wall=1:44.16 (U+S)/W=76.5% I/O=0/0
As a follow-up, here is a more typical SA time on a more
typically sized message:
% wc msg.2.txt
181 1027 7245 msg.2.txt
% time procmail < msg.2.txt
User=4.270 System=0.250 Wall=0:30.13 (U+S)/W=15.0%
the long wall clock times are due to "network checks" which do things
like consult the Ryzor network spam database, and various dynamic
blocking lists (DBL's). If spamc had been called instead of spamassassin,
I'd expect the overall cpu time to be on the order 1 or 2 secs./message,
possibly less, because the overhead of compiling and starting up SA is
eliminated. If performance is an issue, you want to be using spamc/spamd.
Without spamassassin:
gary(_at_)screamer[9]% time procmail < msg.txt
User=0.050 System=0.000 Wall=0:00.04 (U+S)/W=125.0%
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail