Re: high cpu utilization with spamass-milter 0.2.0?

[Dan Nelson]

In the last episode (Jul 28), Changeling said:
> Measuring over a 15 minute interval, using 0.1.3a spamd averages
> about 0.96 seconds (max time was 3.7 seconds) while using 0.2.0 spamd
> averages about 5.26 seconds (max time was 34.86).  Spamass-milter

You might see a slightly longer runtime because 0.2.0 generates a bunch
of headers to mimic what sendmail would add, including a Received:
header containing the originating IP number and date, and
X-Envelope-From: header.  The IP number lets spamassassin do dnsbl
checks, so that could affect processing speed.  Try timing the two
versions after restarting spamd with the -L option (which disables DNS
checks).

> doesn't seem to take any more or less time either way.  When stracing
> I didn't see anything out of the ordinary except that it seemed that
> when several emails came in in a row sometimes spamd would spin a
> while trying to get a lock on the auto-whitelist file.  This caused
> several spamd processes to queue up waiting to access the file.  I
> turned off auto-whitelisting for spamd and now spamd runs as quickly
> with 0.2.0 as it does with 0.1.3a.  However two things still concern
> me: 1. It almost sounds like the problem is with SpamAssassin, but
> why didnt this problem show up until I upgraded to 0.2.0 and why does
> it immediately go away when downgrading to 0.1.3a?  2. Spamd with
> auto-whitelisting running with 0.1.3a runs as quickly as spamd
> without auto-whitelisting running with 0.2.0?
>  It seems almost like spamass-milter is responsible somehow for the
> consumption of the extra resources that are made available once
> auto-whitelisting is turned off.

Do you know if auto-whitelist works based on header From, or envelope
MAIL FROM?  If the latter, then with 0.1.3a spamassassinmay not have
been whitelisting at all, because it didn't know the envelope sender.

-- 
        Dan Nelson
        address@hidden