Re: spam assassin filtering

[Tim Haynes <usenet-Jan-29-2003@stirfried.vegetable.org.uk>]

deskpot@despammed.com (Vasily Korytov) writes:

>  JK> process per message plus some MTA processes. This is verly likely to
>  JK> eat up all of your RAM and end in an disaster, i.e. you will loose
>  JK> your mail. (This happend to me while downloading ~100 messages.)
>
> Use spamd/spamc pair. Anyway, my old modem takes care of not losing my
> mail in such situations. =))

Fetchmail will not flush a message off the upstream server if it gets a
failure code from the local delivery agent. 

spamc/d do make it considerably quicker processing a mail, as the perl
interpreter is only invoked the once.

You can add locking to procmail rules (the fine manpage mentions appending
a `:' to the end of the intro line to a recipe triple).

Me, I have my colo-swerver handle the initial incoming mails, bogofilter
being invoked for anything questionable; the mails that pass are copied on
to the ISP at home and pulled down with fetchmail and re-bogofiltered as
well. Seems to work :)

~Tim
-- 
But mountains are holy places,              |piglet@stirfried.vegetable.org.uk
And beauty is free / We can still walk      |http://spodzone.org.uk/
Through the garden                          |
Our earth was once green                    |