Spamfoo not showing up for some users
Problem reported by Millennium Systems - 8/21/2026 at 2:10 PM
Resolved
We have rolled out Spamfoo Classification gradually across a 2-3 week period. Noticing a pattern of the CPU staying up in the 55-60% usage range whenever we enabled it on a set of domains, and we would wait for the CPU usage to fluctuate again before enabling the next set of domains.

The classification indexing should have been completed a few days ago (as far as we can tell from the CPU usage) and we started seeing some accounts enabled early on still don't have the Classification toggle or Spamfoo dashboard link.

The first 2 such accounts both had sub folders in the Inbox, so we figured that might be the cause. But we have other accounts with Inbox sub folders that do have Classification and found some users with no sub folder Inbox that don't have Classification either.

One domain in question shows Classification on some accounts and not others, so it doesn't appear to be domain related. The accounts with no visible Classification also have no spamfoo folder in the file system.

We disabled and re-enabled Classification on that domain, results remained the same.

Is there any logging on Classification progress or errors?
Derek Curtis Replied
Employee Post Marked As Resolution
Just to make sure, if you check those users, classification is enabled, correct?

SpamFoo will follow whatever setting you have for Max Inbox Messages for Classification. If a user has OVER that number, classification is not enabled by default. The domain admin (or system admin) will have to enable it manually for that user. 

By default, I believe that's 20,000 messages. So having folders in the Inbox could mean that number is surpassed by that user. 

Check the Email Classification on the Domain Defaults page of our help: https://help.smartertools.com/SmarterMail/Current/Topics/SystemAdmin/Manage/DomainDefaults#classification
Derek Curtis
CCO
SmarterTools Inc.
Millennium Systems Replied
Ugh, serves me right for not checking the docs first. I assumed the very thing the NOTE is warning about, thanks Derek. The description on that setting could be clearer.

Reply to Thread

Enter the verification text