Mailing List Archive

On Thu, May 26, 2022, 10:36 AM Reindl Harald, <h.reindl@thelounge.net>
wrote:

>
>
> Am 26.05.22 um 16:32 schrieb Ian Evans:
> > File under "questions I think I already know the answer to."
> >
> > Looking at moving my site to a new host and I'm pondering splitting my
> > web/email servers which have always shared the same server.
> >
> > Our email server is five accounts. Just me and the missus. A big day is
> > receiving 200 emails.
> >
> > Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at the
> > resources needed to run a SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx
> > stack and not ever break a sweat?
>
> when you add clamav later it will be clamav who laughs about 1 GB memory
> after it has sucked it completly
>

Just looked at clamav's memory usage. Ouch. :)

>

On 5/26/22 8:32 AM, Ian Evans wrote:
> Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at the
> resources needed to run a SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx
> stack and not ever break a sweat?

Sadly, I found that I needed to quit tilting at the 1GB memory windmill
and upgraded my tiny VPSs to 2GB for SpamAssassin + ClamAV + some other
milters.

You /might/ be able to get SpamAssassin in 1GB, but I don't know what
else will be on the system.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 02:12:01PM -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 5/26/22 8:32 AM, Ian Evans wrote:
> > Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at the
> > resources needed to run a?SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx
> > stack and not ever break a sweat?
>
> Sadly, I found that I needed to quit tilting at the 1GB memory windmill and
> upgraded my tiny VPSs to 2GB for SpamAssassin + ClamAV + some other milters.
>
> You /might/ be able to get SpamAssassin in 1GB, but I don't know what else
> will be on the system.

You can quite confortably fit SA and a full SMTP + IMAP stack in less
than 1 GB. My (admittedly low volume) mail server is currently sitting
at 340 MB of used memory and is running:
- Postfix
- Dovecot
- Spamassassin
- spamass-milter
- opendkim milter
- Various python mail sorting / organizing scripts
- openssh server
- BIND9 (master DNS server)
- Radicale (DAV server)
- Weave (Firefox sync server)
- Nginx (reverse proxy)

I haven't found the need for any sort of AV scanner. Some SA rules that
reject messages with executable attachments have been more than adequate
for me.

--Sean

On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 3:00 AM Sean Greenslade <sean@seangreenslade.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 02:12:01PM -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
> > On 5/26/22 8:32 AM, Ian Evans wrote:
> > > Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at the
> > > resources needed to run a SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx
> > > stack and not ever break a sweat?
> >
> > Sadly, I found that I needed to quit tilting at the 1GB memory windmill and
> > upgraded my tiny VPSs to 2GB for SpamAssassin + ClamAV + some other milters.
> >
> > You /might/ be able to get SpamAssassin in 1GB, but I don't know what else
> > will be on the system.
>
> You can quite confortably fit SA and a full SMTP + IMAP stack in less
> than 1 GB. My (admittedly low volume) mail server is currently sitting
> at 340 MB of used memory and is running:
> - Postfix
> - Dovecot
> - Spamassassin
> - spamass-milter
> - opendkim milter
> - Various python mail sorting / organizing scripts
> - openssh server
> - BIND9 (master DNS server)
> - Radicale (DAV server)
> - Weave (Firefox sync server)
> - Nginx (reverse proxy)
>
> I haven't found the need for any sort of AV scanner. Some SA rules that
> reject messages with executable attachments have been more than adequate
> for me.
>
> --Sean
>
[.Just realized I replied only to Sean, so reposting to the list so
others can chime in.]

Thinking out loud for a sec...

Since my email traffic is so low, couldn't I leave clamav running on
the more powerful/larger ram web server and have postfix access clamav
on that ip? Just did a quick search and some people are running it on
a separate server. Just a pre-coffee thought.

>> > On 5/26/22 8:32 AM, Ian Evans wrote:
>> > > Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at the
>> > > resources needed to run a SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx
>> > > stack and not ever break a sweat?

On 27.05.22 09:54, Ian Evans wrote:
>Since my email traffic is so low, couldn't I leave clamav running on
>the more powerful/larger ram web server and have postfix access clamav
>on that ip? Just did a quick search and some people are running it on
>a separate server. Just a pre-coffee thought.

yes, should work perfectly.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
I'm not interested in your website anymore.
If you need cookies, bake them yourself.

On 5/27/22 12:59 AM, Sean Greenslade wrote:
> You can quite confortably fit SA and a full SMTP + IMAP stack in less
> than 1 GB. My (admittedly low volume) mail server is currently sitting
> at 340 MB of used memory and is running:

Interesting.

Thank you for the counter point Sean.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 5/26/22 8:32 AM, Ian Evans wrote:
>> Is it safe to assume that a $5/mth 1gig memory account will laugh at
>> the resources needed to run
>> a SpamAssassin/Postfix/Roundcube/Dovecot/Nginx stack and not ever
>> break a sweat?
>
> Sadly, I found that I needed to quit tilting at the 1GB memory windmill
> and upgraded my tiny VPSs to 2GB for SpamAssassin + ClamAV + some other
> milters.
>
> You /might/ be able to get SpamAssassin in 1GB, but I don't know what
> else will be on the system.

Clam is the memory hog. With a bit of tweaking you could run everything
else for a low-volume mail server in 256M - probably including webmail.

Here's a snapshot of my personal system colocated at work Notice that
clamd is third in line to gobble up RAM after a couple of VMs... and
that's strictly with stock signatures. SpamAssassin is also mostly
stock, although I think I bumped the spamd child limit up from default.

11480 libvirt+ 20 0 15.7g 2.9g 24156 S 1.0 9.2 6432:10
qemu-system-x86
1262 libvirt+ 20 0 6509464 1.7g 21324 S 1.0 5.3 1042:56
qemu-system-x86
26531 clamav 20 0 1652780 1.2g 10840 S 0.0 4.0 37:14.45
clamd
1389 www-data 20 0 504660 301888 30464 S 0.0 0.9 10:19.54
apache2
[snip ~10 Apache processes]
26020 root 20 0 145152 124852 7812 S 0.0 0.4 1:46.78
spamd child
7908 defang 20 0 127212 115944 14756 S 0.0 0.4 1:37.65
mimedefang.pl
30084 root 20 0 132296 111632 7388 S 0.0 0.3 0:11.91
spamd child
26233 defang 20 0 119112 108324 13488 S 0.0 0.3 0:01.76
mimedefang.pl
29297 bind 20 0 707620 104780 11088 S 0.0 0.3 30:05.75
named
26021 root 20 0 123924 102984 7388 S 0.0 0.3 0:01.46
spamd child
30101 root 20 0 120960 98164 6008 S 0.0 0.3 0:04.21
spamd child
27041 root 20 0 116648 89448 6364 S 0.0 0.3 13:19.88
spamd
27055 root 20 0 116648 85360 1972 S 0.0 0.3 0:00.05
spamd child
7744 postgres 20 0 211576 66764 64776 S 0.0 0.2 0:08.76
postgres

-kgd