From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8EB8C03EF for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:41:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B2BFB34A91 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:40:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:40:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CEE5C49064; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:40:31 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <2015aeba-8ed5-4250-901f-6778fdcc27c2@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:40:30 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Content-Language: en-US From: Dominik Csapak To: Dietmar Maurer , Markus Frank , pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20240110115654.763820-1-m.frank@proxmox.com> <477134155.2147.1704891166704@webmail.proxmox.com> <411ba218-cfea-4075-bfb0-bee51cbc6051@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <411ba218-cfea-4075-bfb0-bee51cbc6051@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.380 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS 0.8 Email that uses ascii formatting dividers and possible spam tricks KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pmg-devel] [PATCH pmg-api] config: adjust max_filters calculation to reflect current memory usage X-BeenThere: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Mail Gateway development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:41:02 -0000 On 1/10/24 14:38, Dominik Csapak wrote: > On 1/10/24 13:52, Dietmar Maurer wrote: >>> One pmg-smtp-filter process uses at least 220 MiB. >>> When having 100000 rules one process can take up to 330 MiB. >> >> I guess almost nobody has that many rules! So IMHO, with this patch we >> are now too conservative for 99% of all installations. > > i think what markus meant is that he had 100000 entries in a who object, > not rules. That is (sadly) rather realistic and we encounter it often with users/customers. > (even if we don't recommend it) after thinking a bit, 100.000 might really be on the large side, but i saw multiple thousand entries quite often > > i think it's easier than you think to blow up the filter memory usage, we're already > 100 MiB up from the initial assumption without adding any new rules/objects by default. > (e.g. a new spamassassin update can increase that probably quite easily) > > while 300 might be excessive, on our machines we easily observe 230 MiB per worker > so that could be a fine value (like Markus suggested) > >> >> Besides, the rule system is not meant to be used as large block-list. People should set-up a RBL >> server instead, which is far more effective. >> >> - Dietmar >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pmg-devel mailing list >> pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com >> https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > pmg-devel mailing list > pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel > >