From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 19 08:23:49 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07E5016A4CE for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:23:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from zoot.lafn.org (zoot.lafn.ORG [206.117.18.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8958643D39 for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:23:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bc979@lafn.org) Received: from [10.0.1.4] ([4.28.157.47]) (authenticated bits=0) by zoot.lafn.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j2J8Nk26018907 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:23:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bc979@lafn.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) In-Reply-To: <423AB25E.3000909@diewebmaster.at> References: <423AB25E.3000909@diewebmaster.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Doug Hardie Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:23:45 -0800 To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.82, clamav-milter version 0.82 on zoot.lafn.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: dspam data sizes X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:23:49 -0000 On Mar 18, 2005, at 02:50, Christian Damm wrote: > > this was discussed in detail (several times) on the dspam mailing list > - search the archives: > 'http://dspam.nuclearelephant.com/search.shtml'. > > you can extremely cut down your db size using different > methods...which training method you are currently using? - once dspam > is "mature" enough (training wise) it is (for example) a good idea to > switch to TOE mode (train on error) if your user base is large - your > db shrinks and the performance gain is big. > > Doug Hardie schrieb: >> After seeing the recommendations here I am testing dspam. I >> currently have 2 users testing it. They are at both extreme ends of >> mail demands. My account gets about 1000 emails a day of which about >> 25-30% are spam. The other account gets about 100 emails a day of >> which about 90% are spam. So far, dspam is quarantining about 1/3rd >> of the spam I receive. Is basically the same as Apple's mail >> filtering. My mail is being sent to both. However, the storage of >> the data used by dspam is a bit overwhealming. The storage is at 250 >> MB for me and 20 MB for the other account. I have cut way down the >> purge retention intervals which appears to help somewhat but not >> enough. I have thousands of users and at 250 MB per user (it would >> probably be a bit below that) its just not practical. How do other >> users of dspam deal with this issue? Is there some setting I have >> wrong (or at least not set most efficently)? Thanks. I dug through the archives and it appears the recommend approach is to use BDB4 as the backend with TOE mode, chained disabled, and frequent dspam_clean -p0, and -s0 purges. My current setup is: sqlite backend TOE mode nightly purges using the provided script but with the days reduced to 3. Will have about 3K users when in production chained has been disabled I believe all other settings are default except that I have to use Home directories for the data storage.