Byteplant Forum

Home » CleanMail Support » CleanMail Home Talk » So Sloooow
So Sloooow [message #2027] Thu, 13 May 2004 18:47
billwill
Messages: 2
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
I've installed the trial edition of No Spam today For Workstations and it is running as described, but it is incredibly slow!

It is taking around 30 to 60 or more seconds to process each email even though they are only typically 3 to 8 kilobytes big.

With my typical load of 500 or so spam messages perday this will mean that it could take 8 hours to get to a critical email. This is not practical!

I use Outlook Express in the ordinary way with a POP server at an ISP and have a 512 KBPS broadband link. Normal download of a batch of email say 100 messages is only a few minutes.

Is this slow behavior normal, or is it slugged while in trial mode or what? At this speed it will not be sensible for me to buy it, nor to recommend it to my clients.

FYI: I notice in task manager that spamassassin.exe is running at low priority, but nonetheless it is still getting over 45% (typically 88%) of the CPU. It is not possible to increase the priory in task manager for more than one shot as it appears to be called afresh for each message.


==========
Later
I uninstalled it and reinstalled without the additional rulesets in case that was the cause of the problem, but it does not make a significant difference, just a little quicker I think, but not quick enough. These are ordinary messages that were saved on the server, though most of the spam had been deleted from the server using the Outlook Express facility to delete from server when deleted from client.

Log extract (note the interval between mail messages):
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 No Spam Today! for Workstations V1.0.3.3 Trial starting ...
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 Version Build Date: Mon, Apr 5, 2004
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 Key Creation Date:
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 Registration Date: Thu, May 13, 2004
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 OS version: Windows XP
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 Physical Memory: 256MB
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 DetailedLogging=0
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 MaxLogFileSize=10000000
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 IncomingPort=110
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 DNSServer=192.168.252.80
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 HideProgress=0
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 MaxSpamSize=200000
May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 No Spam Today! for Workstations V1.0.3.3 Trial listening on 127.0.0.1 port 110
May 13, 2004, 18:04:32 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:04:45 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:04:59 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:05:17 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:05:30 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:05:48 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail
May 13, 2004, 18:06:02 Session 0: incoming non-spam mail



Post Edited (05-13-04 19:10)


Bill^2
Re: So Sloooow [message #2028 is a reply to message #2027] Fri, 14 May 2004 10:51 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
billwill wrote:

> It is taking around 30 to 60 or more seconds to process each
> email even though they are only typically 3 to 8 kilobytes
> big.

If your CPU is not downright ancient, about 2seconds is normal, so about 20s as in your case is a bit much.

> May 13, 2004, 18:03:12 DNSServer=192.168.252.80

Maybe your DNS servers is a bit slow, or it isn't a name server at all. Open a command line window, and type something like

nslookup byteplant.com 192.168.252.80

and watch the response and the time it takes. Or run spamassassin with a sample mail in debug mode, and watch the debug output:

cd YourInstallationDirectory
set RES_NAMESERVERS=192.168.252.80
sa\spamassassin -x -D -c sa\ruleset < sa\sample-spam2.txt > out



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2029 is a reply to message #2028] Fri, 14 May 2004 19:25 Go to previous message
billwill
Messages: 2
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
The DNS server is OK & too quick to see the delay in a command box. Using my ISPs DNS server in the SET command did not make a significant change in the time of the test run shown.

The test run of spam assassin looks like the log below. I note that it looks for user prefs but there isn't such a file there & it also looks for non-existent folder /etc/spamassasin This log was not the first shot, so DNS lookups should be in the cache. On screen I can see a significant pause when the command is first called and another pause after the line about user_prefs.


18:04:37.26>sa\spamassassin -x -D -c sa\ruleset < sa\sample-spam2.txt > out
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? no
debug: defining getpwuid() wrapper using 'unknown' as username
debug: using "sa\ruleset" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc/spamassassin" for site rules dir
debug: using "C:\Documents and Settings\Bill/.spamassassin/user_prefs" for user
prefs file
debug: bayes: 360 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 360 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 2
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 9 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing db_seen
debug: Score set 1 chosen.
debug: Initialising learner
debug: bayes: 360 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 360 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 2
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 9 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 360 untie-ing db_seen
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=212.17.35.15 rdns=dogma.slashnull.org hel
o=dogma.slashnull.org by=mail.netnoteinc.com ident= ]
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=128.195.21.213 rdns=xent.ics.uci.edu helo
=XeNT.ics.uci.edu by=dogma.slashnull.org ident= ]
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=208.184.130.52 rdns=blue.mydomain.com hel
o=blue.mydomain.com by=XeNT.ics.uci.edu ident= ]
debug: dns_available set to no in config file, skipping test
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=200.28.105.254 rdns=200.28.105.254 helo=n
s.fundch.cl by=blue.mydomain.com ident= ]
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=63.10.249.142 rdns= helo=y068k3017 by=ns.
fundch.cl ident= ]
debug: received-header: cannot use DNS, do not trust any hosts from here on
debug: received-header: relay 212.17.35.15 trusted? no
debug: received-header: relay 128.195.21.213 trusted? no
debug: received-header: relay 208.184.130.52 trusted? no
debug: received-header: relay 200.28.105.254 trusted? no
debug: received-header: relay 63.10.249.142 trusted? no
debug: running header regexp tests; score so far=0
debug: running body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=2.588
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=4.651
debug: running uri tests; score so far=4.651
debug: uri tests: Done uriRE
debug: running full-text regexp tests; score so far=4.651
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found.
debug: Current PATH is: C:\WINDOWS\system32;C:\WINDOWS;C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem;
"C:\Program Files\Symantec\Norton Ghost 2003\";C:\Program Files\Common Files\Ada
ptec Shared\System
debug: DCC is not available: no executable dccproc found.
debug: Pyzor is not available: pyzor not found
debug: all '*From' addrs: xl6Ety00V@fismat1.fcfm.buap.mx dev_null_sample_spam@ex
ample.com
debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
debug: looking up PTR record for '63.10.249.142'
debug: PTR for '63.10.249.142': ''
debug: round-the-world: mail relayed through ns.fundch.cl by 63.10.249.142 (HELO
y068k3017, rev DNS says )
debug: round-the-world: probably not
debug: all '*To' addrs: dev_null_sample_spam@netnoteinc.com dev_null_sample_spam
@jmason.org
debug: forged-HELO: from=slashnull.org helo=slashnull.org by=netnoteinc.com
debug: forged-HELO: from=uci.edu helo=uci.edu by=slashnull.org
debug: forged-HELO: from=mydomain.com helo=mydomain.com by=uci.edu
debug: forged-HELO: from=200.28.105.254 helo=ns.fundch.cl by=mydomain.com
debug: forged-HELO: mismatch on HELO: 'ns.fundch.cl' != '200.28.105.254'
debug: forged-HELO: from= helo=y068k3017 by=ns.fundch.cl
debug: forged-HELO: mismatch on from: '200.28.105.254' != 'ns.fundch.cl'
debug: running meta tests; score so far=5.036
debug: auto-learn? ham=0.1, spam=12, body-hits=2.063, head-hits=2.973
debug: auto-learn: currently using scoreset 1. no need to recompute.
debug: auto-learn? no: inside auto-learn thresholds
debug: is spam? score=6.836 required=7 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_12_24,DRASTIC_REDUCED,
FROM_HAS_MIXED_NUMS,FROM_HAS_MIXED_NUMS3,INVALID_MSGID,LINES_OF_YELLING,NO_REAL_
NAME,REMOVE_SUBJ

18:04:56.84>


=============
and a run with a typical spam message from my mail

=============
18:21:34.28>
18:21:34.66>sa\spamassassin -x -D -c sa\ruleset < sa\mytypicalspam.txt > out
debug: Score set 0 chosen.
debug: running in taint mode? no
debug: defining getpwuid() wrapper using 'unknown' as username
debug: using "sa\ruleset" for default rules dir
debug: using "/etc/spamassassin" for site rules dir
debug: using "C:\Documents and Settings\Bill/.spamassassin/user_prefs" for user
prefs file
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 2
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 9 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_seen
debug: Score set 1 chosen.
debug: Initialising learner
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/O db\bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 2
debug: bayes: Not available for scanning, only 9 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_seen
debug: received-header: parsed as [ ip=219.192.104.59 rdns=yahoobb219192104059.
btec.net helo=yahoobb219192104059.bbtec.net by=feynman.zen.co.uk ident= ]
debug: dns_available set to no in config file, skipping test
debug: received-header: cannot use DNS, do not trust any hosts from here on
debug: received-header: relay 219.192.104.59 trusted? no
debug: running header regexp tests; score so far=0
debug: running body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=0
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: running raw-body-text per-line regexp tests; score so far=0.886
debug: running uri tests; score so far=13.886
debug: uri tests: Done uriRE
debug: running full-text regexp tests; score so far=14.67
debug: Razor2 is not available
debug: DCCifd is not available: no r/w dccifd socket found.
debug: Current PATH is: C:\WINDOWS\system32;C:\WINDOWS;C:\WINDOWS\System32\Wbem
"C:\Program Files\Symantec\Norton Ghost 2003\";C:\Program Files\Common Files\Ad
ptec Shared\System
debug: DCC is not available: no executable dccproc found.
debug: Pyzor is not available: pyzor not found
debug: all '*From' addrs: ceqzferebolu@eunet.pt
debug: all '*To' addrs: billwill_nstf@datahighways.co.uk
debug: forged-HELO: from=bbtec.net helo=bbtec.net by=zen.co.uk
debug: running meta tests; score so far=14.67
debug: auto-learn? ham=0.1, spam=12, body-hits=14.67, head-hits=13
debug: auto-learn: currently using scoreset 1. no need to recompute.
debug: auto-learn? yes, spam (20.071 > 12)
debug: Learning Spam
debug: uri tests: Done uriRE
debug: lock: 2728 trying to get lock on db\bayes with 0 retries
debug: lock: 2728 link to db\bayes.lock: sysopen ok
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/W db\bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 tie-ing to DB file R/W db\bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 2
debug: LWJLJDLJVTDCYEQHEETTGUZ@kais.kyoto-u.ac.jp: already learnt correctly, no
learning twice
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_toks
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing db_seen
debug: bayes: files locked, now unlocking lock
debug: unlock: 2728 unlink db\bayes.lock
debug: bayes: 2728 untie-ing
debug: is spam? score=20.071 required=7 tests=BIZ_TLD,HTML_40_50,HTML_FONTCOLOR
UNSAFE,HTML_FONT_BIG,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY,J_BACKHAIR_11,J_BACKHAI
_12,J_BACKHAIR_13,J_BACKHAIR_14,J_BACKHAIR_16,J_BACKHAIR_21,J_BACKHAIR_22,J_BAC
HAIR_23,J_BACKHAIR_31,J_BACKHAIR_33,J_BACKHAIR_41,J_BACKHAIR_44,J_BACKHAIR_51,L
NES_OF_YELLING,MIME_HTML_ONLY,MIME_HTML_ONLY_MULTI,OBFUSCATING_COMMENT

18:21:54.37>
18:21:57.08>



Bill^2
Re: So Sloooow [message #2030 is a reply to message #2029] Mon, 17 May 2004 12:24 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
> The DNS server is OK & too quick to see the delay in a
> command box. Using my ISPs DNS server in the SET command did
> not make a significant change in the time of the test run
> shown.
>
> The test run of spam assassin looks like the log below. I
> note that it looks for user prefs but there isn't such a file
> there & it also looks for non-existent folder /etc/spamassasin
> This log was not the first shot, so DNS lookups should be in
> the cache. On screen I can see a significant pause when the
> command is first called and another pause after the line about
> user_prefs.
> ...

Sounds strange.
Please check your dns_available and skip_rbl_checks settings in the local.cf
file and if this doesn't help post your local.cf and nospamtoday.cf files (or send it to the support address) for inspection.



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2031 is a reply to message #2030] Wed, 19 May 2004 01:14 Go to previous message
Badger
Messages: 1
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
Hi there -

I am experiencing the same problem - very slow incoming email. It takes 2.5 minutes to download 21 emails. I typically receive 150 first thing in the morning, so this means I actually have time to make coffee before reading my email!

When I first installed No Spam Today! a few months ago on my PC (PIII running Win XP) there was no noticable difference with respect to download time. I later added a whitelist and blacklist, neither of which is very long (< 20 entries each). I experimented with RBL Checks but finally left it set to "skip". It's only been the last 2 weeks or so that I've noticed the speed decline.

I deleted both black- and whitelist. No change. I checked the DNS response time - too fast to clock, so that's okay.

I read your last suggestion:

"Please check your dns_available and
skip_rbl_checks settings
in the local.cf file"

which means I should open the local.cf in a text editor, but what values should I be looking for? Other than an incorrect DNS, that is, but since I've checked its speed I know it's a good address.

By the way, I must say that the slowdown in downloading is still much easier to live with than the spam! Other than this little mystery, I am very happy with this software. There are days when I get 400 to 500 emails (one day was 700!) of which 85% are spam.

Thanks for any help you can offer!

Re: So Sloooow [message #2032 is a reply to message #2027] Wed, 26 May 2004 16:23 Go to previous message
kenalmond
Messages: 3
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
I like the filtering but its pretty slooooow - took 4 to 6 hours to do 2,500 emails on Dual 3.2GHZ server (w/fast disk). I'm getting over 2000 emails per day now that my domain name has been sold and my provider allows all username@domain to come thru.
Re: So Sloooow [message #2033 is a reply to message #2027] Wed, 26 May 2004 17:27 Go to previous message
RikTheRik
Messages: 2
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
I have to say that the new byteplant version is horribly slow. NoSpamToday wasn't that slow with the previous versions. There must be something wrong there!!
Also I found the new version to be way more buggy.
I disabled no spam today until the slow issue will be improved (I'm a registered user).
Re: So Sloooow [message #2034 is a reply to message #2031] Wed, 26 May 2004 17:51 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
> which means I should open the local.cf in a text editor, but
> what values should I be looking for? Other than an incorrect
> DNS, that is, but since I've checked its speed I know it's a
> good address.

Yes. There are two settings of interest:
skip_rbl_checks 0
dns_available yes

... but if your DNS server works nicely I don't believe your slowdown is caused by this. Try disabling the Bayes database and watch the debug output:

bayes_auto_learn 0
use_bayes 0



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2035 is a reply to message #2032] Wed, 26 May 2004 17:56 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
kenalmond wrote:

> I like the filtering but its pretty slooooow - took 4 to 6
> hours to do 2,500 emails on Dual 3.2GHZ server (w/fast disk).
> I'm getting over 2000 emails per day now that my domain name
> has been sold and my provider allows all username@domain to
> come thru.

This is not top performance, but it is OK.Expect 1-2 seconds per mail, if the system load is not to heavy, more if the load is higher, or if your DNS server is slow to respond. Are you using the Workstation version or the SMTP Proxy?



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2036 is a reply to message #2033] Wed, 26 May 2004 18:00 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
RikTheRik wrote:

> I have to say that the new byteplant version is horribly
> slow. NoSpamToday wasn't that slow with the previous versions.
> There must be something wrong there!!
> Also I found the new version to be way more buggy.
> I disabled no spam today until the slow issue will be
> improved (I'm a registered user).

We are not aware of any newly introduced bugs in the latest version. If there are any, please be a little more specific, perhaps you can help us find them.

If the latest version does not work for you, you can revert to the previous version at any time.



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2037 is a reply to message #2027] Tue, 13 July 2004 20:13 Go to previous message
CraigB
Messages: 2
Registered: July 2004
Junior Member
My e-mail is sloooow also using no-spam-today. I would have stopped using it, except that it gets rid of about 98% of my SPAM. It takes 20 to 30 seconds per message to download. This is with 1gig of memory, cable modem, and an Athlon 3000+ processor with no other applications running or using the internet.

When I connect without no-spam-today, each email takes less than 2 seconds. I am using the most recent version to date.

Is there anything that can be done? I can provide IP packet sniffs, no-spam-today logs and such.

Craig
Re: So Sloooow [message #2038 is a reply to message #2027] Wed, 14 July 2004 04:44 Go to previous message
CraigB
Messages: 2
Registered: July 2004
Junior Member
Jul 13, 2004, 21:41:46 session 0: Incoming spam mail
Jul 13, 2004, 21:42:03 session 0: Incoming spam mail
Jul 13, 2004, 21:42:20 session 0: Incoming non-spam mail
Jul 13, 2004, 21:42:34 session 0: Incoming spam mail
Jul 13, 2004, 21:42:48 session 0: Incoming spam mail
Re: So Sloooow [message #2039 is a reply to message #2038] Wed, 14 July 2004 11:17 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
Maybe your DNS server is slow, our something is misconfigured. Please collect the SpamAssassin debug output, and send it by mail.

Instructions how to collect the debug output have been posted earlier in this thread.



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2040 is a reply to message #2039] Sat, 17 July 2004 00:03 Go to previous message
RikTheRik
Messages: 2
Registered: May 2004
Junior Member
Why aren't you implementing a DNS caching mechanism if speed issues are centered around the DNS ?
It is not easy to see if a DNS server is slow.
Re: So Sloooow [message #2041 is a reply to message #2027] Sat, 17 July 2004 15:24 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
Here is something else you might try to set this issue to rest:

> FYI: I notice in task manager that spamassassin.exe is
> running at low priority, but nonetheless it is still getting
> over 45% (typically 88%) of the CPU. It is not possible to
> increase the priory in task manager for more than one shot as
> it appears to be called afresh for each message.

NoSpamToday by default runs Spamassassin with low priority. We intended to keep the interference of mail downloads with normal work at a minimum.

It might help in this issue if you override this default. Add this line to the nospamtoday.cf file to set the spamassassin priority to normal:

SpamCheckPriority=1

Maybe we will make this setting the default in the next version.



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2042 is a reply to message #2027] Fri, 29 October 2004 16:16 Go to previous message
annelavin
Messages: 1
Registered: October 2004
Junior Member
I'm experiencing a very similar problem, or at least horrible slowness; ever since I upgraded to v1.0.6.2 earlier this week, email has gotten so slow as to become unusable.

I've checked my DNS speed, and it's just fine; I've checked my PO server, and it's responding normally, too. I've tried shutting off the RBL checks, and still email takes at least 10 seconds per message to come in, if it even works. Now I'm pretty consistently getting server timeouts and errors, repeated requests for my password, all sorts of weird stuff. I've had to shut off No Spam Today in order to make things work. (Without the software running, email comes in normally.)

I did turn debug mode for the logs before I shut things off, so I have some data, I hope, if that's of use.

Help!

Anne
Re: So Sloooow [message #2043 is a reply to message #2027] Mon, 08 November 2004 09:38 Go to previous message
slimsilverstein
Messages: 3
Registered: November 2004
Junior Member
I would agree, the newer versions do seem to process mail slower than older versions. I can now watch Outlook downloading (for example) "324b of 3.2kb" and it will take maybe 15 seconds to get that one message. In addition, my processor usage spikes when processing mail.

Stupidly, I deleted my old backup versions of "No Spam Today!" a few months ago and can't test for sure whether it is the new versions or something about my PC that is the cause of this performance. Is there any way to get a pre-byteplant build for comparison?
Re: So Sloooow [message #2044 is a reply to message #2043] Mon, 08 November 2004 12:04 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
If you disable RBL checks, please make sure that SpamCopURI is not installed. Maybe this helps. What version did you use before upgrading?



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2045 is a reply to message #2027] Fri, 12 November 2004 13:19 Go to previous message
slimsilverstein
Messages: 3
Registered: November 2004
Junior Member
I'll re-label "spamcop_uri.cf " just to make sure that that isn't the problem. As far as what version I was using before upgrading, I've been using the software for nearly a year now and upgraded at every version. The slower processing is something I noticed about 5 months ago (what version was released around that time?), but didn't think too much about it at the time because I was having ISP problems.

One thing that has also occured to me that could be a problem is Outlook itself. Outlook 2003 has built-in spam filtering which I believe is turned on automatically and that might be related. I'll try it out and report back after a few days.

Re: So Sloooow [message #2046 is a reply to message #2027] Wed, 17 November 2004 10:28 Go to previous message
slimsilverstein
Messages: 3
Registered: November 2004
Junior Member
Well, I've done everything I can think of, but I still can't be sure what is causing the slow mail processing problem. It does seem that even when accounts are de-selected, No Spam Today is still processing them, which is odd and makes it hard to find the real root of the problem. There are other strange things happening, however, but I'll address those in a separate thread when I get a solid list together.
Re: So Sloooow [message #2047 is a reply to message #2027] Tue, 23 November 2004 17:24 Go to previous message
donzee
Messages: 2
Registered: November 2004
Junior Member
Hello, same problem here. Have also tried all the above mentioned, still need almost one minute to download 1 message. Downloading mail ususally ends in a host timeout.

Thought I had found a replacement for SAProxy, but like this it won't work.

Is there a way to get a copy of an older version?

I am on w2k, AMD 1,6 Ghz, 768MB, PMail for windows

Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:49 session 0: USER maarten@mainax:pop3.demon.nl
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: +OK
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: PASS xxxxxx
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: +OK 1 message for maarten@mainax.demon.nl
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: STAT
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: +OK 1 1511
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: LIST
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: +OK
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: 1 1511
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: .
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: RETR 1
Nov 23, 2004, 17:18:50 session 0: +OK
Nov 23, 2004, 17:20:51 session 0: Incoming non-spam mail
Nov 23, 2004, 17:21:10 session 0: Connection reset by client (recv failed)
Nov 23, 2004, 17:21:10 session 0: Connection from 127.0.0.1 closed


Anyone?

Maarten

Re: So Sloooow [message #2048 is a reply to message #2047] Tue, 23 November 2004 17:57 Go to previous message
support
Messages: 919
Registered: April 2004
Senior Member
Maarten,

perhaps we can help you if you send us your configuration files, and maybe the log file, to nstsupport@byteplant.com (noSPAMtoday.cf, sa\ruleset\local.cf).

Also, make sure the DNS server you configured is indeed a DNS server, and not an RBL server. It is a common error for users to enter RBL servers here instead of a DNS server.



Customer Support
Byteplant GmbH
Re: So Sloooow [message #2049 is a reply to message #2048] Tue, 23 November 2004 22:03 Go to previous message
donzee
Messages: 2
Registered: November 2004
Junior Member
files are send to nstsuport.

What mailclient you guys use? I found out that Pegasus consumes 100% CPU during mailchecks. That doesn't leave mutch juice for sa / nst I think...

Maarten
Next Topic: Need Cleanup at pop3?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Dec 02 18:57:25 CET 2016