[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Kevin <[email protected]>
Bryan Irvine <[email protected]>
Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:48:56 -0600
a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=lTGW6EekuL4vXtSsJatcHQcIWeF6BRo94HvWVXmU/BdtqUJH0Clp8GTH12zigJr8Xq8+X6LcjdvHin6LHWFV7VKZvcjiup9ofbYWaYS4bMa+n35oxbERNidCNzmFMnJMDgxHLv20TGMTB0M8GAVaP3TbJfoc1dOo33q8EwWyO+M=
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 10:37:33 -0800, Bryan Irvine <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm trying to laod the enormous CBL into my spamd table, but it seems
> to be far to large.
What happens when you try?
> I found this thread from back in April:
> Does this apply if I'm on 3.6? I don't want to go applying old patches.
> The thread seems to mention a Gig of RAM as some sort of requirement
> (actually it says you shouldn't need more than 1G) is 1G recomended if
> you are going to be loading the CBL?
It appears that the referenced message is about OpenBSD 3.4, there
have been a lot of changes to pf tables since then.