- Previous message: Kev: "performance"
- Maybe in reply to: Kev: "performance"
- Next in thread: Kev: "Re[2]: performance"
- Reply: Kev: "Re[2]: performance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Magnus Bäck (no email)
Date: Tue Jan 03 2006 - 01:41:19 EST
On Tuesday, January 03, 2006 at 06:05 CET,
Kev <> wrote:
> http://www.sa-blacklist.stearns.org/sa-blacklist/sa-blacklist.current
(File with 341k lines.)
> i was thinking about using that list with my sender_access list,
> how much performance will i be loosing with this ?
Probably very little, perhaps not even a measurable loss, but why don't you
measure it yourself? Build an indexed database using different map types
(hash, btree, cdb etc) and measure the lookup time with "postmap -q".
Compare with measurements of lookups against a very small database so you
know the constant-time overhead of postmap(1).
> is it a good ida to use such a BIG list ?
It's hardly a performance problem, but would it really stop that much
crap? Spammers often change their sender addresses, so I expect 99.9 %
of the domains in that list won't hit your server in a million years.
Static blacklists are not the best way to fight spam.
-- Magnus Bäck
|
|
|