Re: [Assp-user] How much CPU?

[Roger S. <R_S...@ne...>]

I'm starting to not think so.  I have incrementally dropped the SMTP Idle
Timeout setting from a high of 60 seconds to a low of 8 seconds.  It does
run for a longer period of time, relative to the reduction of the timeout
period, but it eventually fails.  It has yet to run more than a half hour
all day.

Roger Stevenson

-----Original Message-----
From: tz...@st... [mailto:tz...@st...]
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 11:48 AM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] How much CPU?


In 19 Jul 2006 at 11:25, Roger Stevenson wrote:

> I tested this theory and this is how I did it:
> 
> I put the ASSP in test mode and had it mark spam by appending a phrase
> to the email subject.  Then, as it passed through the Symantec AV
> system on the back end I had it pull those tagged emails.  This way
> ASSP would accept all messages and the Syantec system would cull them.
> 
> It didn't help.  The ASSP server croaked after about 5 minutes.  I
> have the Symantec system doing all the work now and it isn't failing
> at all.  
> 
> Roger Stevenson
> 

Then it's not the same problem. You would have noticed an immediate decrease
in volume, to the 
tune of 98%.

It's probably the length of the timeout like Fritz said.

Amy

Amy Stinson
Amy's Answers, LLC
email:  ast...@am...
web:  http://www.amys-answers.com
phone:  317.885-1741




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Assp-user mailing list
Ass...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user