This is a discussion on Re: Are W. Stearn's blacklist in 3.2.* usable? - SpamAssassin ; Quoting Peter Farrell : > Hi all. > > Testing new setup: > CentOS 4.4 > amavisd-new-2.5.1 > SpamAssassin version 3.2.1 > running on Perl version 5.8.5 > +RulesDuJour > Quad proc Dell PE w/ 4 GB RAM. > > ...
Quoting Peter Farrell
> Hi all.
> Testing new setup:
> CentOS 4.4
> SpamAssassin version 3.2.1
> running on Perl version 5.8.5
> Quad proc Dell PE w/ 4 GB RAM.
> Using calls to the timestamp function I've been testing this setup
> over the past week. While following the debug output I've removed:
> SARE_FRAUD and
> SARE_HEADER0 from my TRUSTED_RULESETS in RulesDuJour/config
> And also removed
> 70_sare_specific.cf in /etc/mail/spamassassin -D --lint. It is not
> compatible with SA3.2.
> Fair enough. But the processing time during the manual test was still
> really slow. Depending on the message, the total processing time
> averaged between 8-15 >>minutes<< per message!
> *If I then dropped both the blacklist[-uri] out, the timing was a
> consistent ~45 seconds per message.
Please DO NOT use sa-blacklist. Use multi.surbl.org instead. Bill will tell
you the same thing when he gets a chance.
No one should be using sa-blacklist any more. It's way too large and
inefficient. The WS bit in multi.surbl.org has the same data and it's in
DNSBL form so there is no huge ruleset to fill up your memory, just DNS
queries. In your case it's probably causing spamassassin to swap out of