Re: [exim] Failover if spamd fails

On 3/14/2005 5:30, "Andrew Nimmo" <andrew.nimmo+exim.org@???> wrote:

> wouldn't it be more productive to find out why your spamd processes die?

It appears to be ingrained deeply in the innate knowledge of spamd.

It isn't happening here as often as it used to, so perhaps the roughly
current version is more robust. One the other hand, our first and second
tier spam controls are keeping the SA load very much lower than it used to
be.

(I got a false alarm this morning (I love false alarm 05:00 pages) from the
monitor which watches the length of the queue of messages awaiting SA...I
haven't had a real alarm for some time now.)

--John