Re: Which spam filter do you use?
* Kyle Wheeler <kyle-mutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2007-10-05 09:38]:
> I will say, though, it is true that SpamAssassin is really slow, but
> not for the reason many people claim.
My claim is that spamd requires an order of magnitude more CPU and
memory ressources than Bogofilter and others do. Of course, that's
usually not an issue on single-user systems.
> We have a pretty standard spamc/spamd setup, and if I turn off all the
> network tests, it flies.
At my workplace, for about 40.000 users, we need six dedicated servers
for spamd and one which does Bogofilter and other stuff.
> As for impact, it chunks through on the order of 5000 emails a day, of
> which over 86% is spam (according to my logs), and I think the last
> time I got a message that was incorrectly classified was probably...
> maybe a week ago, or so.
So you get about 1 out of 35.000 messages misclassified (which would be
an accuracy of about 99.997%)? I cannot quite believe that :-) In any
case, it does sound as if you do get significantly better results out of
SpamAssassin than I ever did, despite a lot of tweaking I tried.
> I think the real question you need to ask is: does my current spam
> system work sufficiently well for my taste, and what am I willing to
> pay to get better accuracy?
Yes.
Holger