bgware: mailfront / qmail-qfilter / vmailmgr "spring'08 cleanup" required...


Previous by date: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: Announce: mailfront-plugin-policyd version 0.02, Olivier Mueller
Next by date: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: Announce: mailfront-plugin-policyd version 0.02, Bernhard Graf
Previous in thread: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: mailfront / qmail-qfilter / vmailmgr "spring'08 cleanup" required..., Trevor Astrope
Next in thread:

Subject: Re: [bgware] mailfront / qmail-qfilter / vmailmgr "spring'08 cleanup" required...
From: Olivier Mueller ####@####.####
Date: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000
Message-Id: <1210079657.7040.41.camel@olipc.insign.ch>

On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 09:08 -0400, Trevor Astrope wrote:
> Agreed. I think it is spamd that is using most of the cpu/memory, at least 
> in my case. I use mailfront, but I have no experience with qmail-qfilter. 
> I'd be interested if you find a solution

in my test "run-filter", I now try:

exec /usr/bin/qmail-qfilter \
 /var/qmail/qfilterdev/qfilter-clamdscan -- /usr/bin/spamc -d
192.168.1.126 -- /var/qmail/qfilterdev/qfilter-spamc 

-> the advantage of spamd ist that you can put it on another
server... :)    But this way all mails are scanned or none, I'd need
to get some specific params per user/per domain...

> Btw, mppd is written in C++ and uses less cpu than spamd (when using 
> cloudmark), but it still uses a lot of memory. And you have to purchase 
> licenses for both mpp itself as well as for cloudmark. I prefer it, but my 
> employer pays for it, not me. :)

okay, thanks for the update!
Olivier



Previous by date: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: Announce: mailfront-plugin-policyd version 0.02, Olivier Mueller
Next by date: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: Announce: mailfront-plugin-policyd version 0.02, Bernhard Graf
Previous in thread: 6 May 2008 13:14:24 -0000 Re: mailfront / qmail-qfilter / vmailmgr "spring'08 cleanup" required..., Trevor Astrope
Next in thread:


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.21.