On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 10:25:20PM -0500, Rick Mallett wrote:
> The issue is that bayes expiry is broken under some circumstances
> as evidenced by this listing of my bayes database area, possibly
> because its taking more than 10 minutes, or possibly because there
> is a bug in the code
Well, you
Perhaps I spoke too quickly when I suggested that the bayes
expiry code must be broken. I finally read David Lee's message
carefully and realized that the expiry code might be getting timed
out by mimedefang or sendmail and interrupted before it has time to
complete. I should have read it earlier b
The issue is that bayes expiry is broken under some circumstances
as evidenced by this listing of my bayes database area, possibly
because its taking more than 10 minutes, or possibly because there
is a bug in the code
-rw--- 1 defang defang32 Jan 26 12:19 bayes.lock
-rw--- 1
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:57:56PM +, David Lee wrote:
> The MailScanner maintainer, Julian Field, is very responsive, and he has
> already coded up an alternative way of driving SA from MS, so that its use
> of SA can avoid auto-expire (and thereby avoid the possible multiple
> simultaneous ex
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Rick Mallett wrote:
> [...]
> Now I've got a much bigger problem. The expiry is starting to take
> more than 10 minutes and as a result the journal grows to max size and
> an opportunistic rebuild kills the lock file and wrecks the expiry
> operation. Here is what I observe in
In an earlier posting I pointed out that I had noticed that a
db_verify on bayes_toks frequently yields errors of the form
db_verify: Page 2289: hash page has bad prev_pgno
db_verify: Page 2110: hash page has bad prev_pgno
and I asked if I should just ignore the errors since bayes seemed
to b
Well... I never say never, but I switched into the correct directory,
checked with -V and it looks good.
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Jack Gostl writes:
> >
> >I need some help here guys.
> >
> >I have updated my Db to BerkeleyDB.4.2, I have reinstalled DB_file from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jack Gostl writes:
>
>I need some help here guys.
>
>I have updated my Db to BerkeleyDB.4.2, I have reinstalled DB_file from
>CPAN, then I wiped out my Bayes databases and started to rebuild from my
>spam corpus.
>
>When I run db_verify I still get th
I need some help here guys.
I have updated my Db to BerkeleyDB.4.2, I have reinstalled DB_file from
CPAN, then I wiped out my Bayes databases and started to rebuild from my
spam corpus.
When I run db_verify I still get these messages:
db_verify: bayes_seen: hash version 5 requires a version upg
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 11:30:21AM +0300, Kai Risku wrote:
> As I debugged the code a bit more, I came to the conclusion that
> the power-of-two approach just had trouble coping with by database.
> Perhaps it had something to do with my recent upgrade from 2.55
> to 2.60, but it seemed like most of
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Bayes problems and expiring
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:43:01AM +0300, Kai Risku wrote:
> > debug: bayes: expiry check keep size, 75% of max: 112500
> > debug: bayes: token count: 161438, final goal reduction size: 48938
> > d
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 09:43:01AM +0300, Kai Risku wrote:
> debug: bayes: expiry check keep size, 75% of max: 112500
> debug: bayes: token count: 161438, final goal reduction size: 48938
> debug: bayes: First pass? Current: 1065075477, Last: 1065043573, atime: 0,
> count: 0, newdelta: 0, ratio: 0
I am currently running SpamAssassin 2.60 and I did migrate the bayes
database from 2.55 according to the instructions. However, I still have
problems with SA getting timeouts while using the Bayes database, and
someone else had earlier concluded that the Bayes checks get really slow
when there are
Daniel J. Andrea II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
in SpamAssassinTalk on 24-Jul-03 20:51:11 -->
DJA> Well, I got it trained again and it now shows the bayes tokens
DJA> when I run the sample spam through it. However, I am still not
DJA> getting the bayes tokens on the emails as they come through.
(s
Daniel J. Andrea II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
in SpamAssassinTalk on 24-Jul-03 20:51:11 -->
DJA> Well, I got it trained again and it now shows the bayes tokens
DJA> when I run the sample spam through it. However, I am still not
DJA> getting the bayes tokens on the emails as they come through.
D
Daniel J. Andrea II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
in SpamAssassinTalk on 22-Jul-03 18:18:22 -->
DJA> Yup, that's the issue. It says I only have 134 hams in the DB.
DJA> :-(
(snip)
DJA> Ah well, guess I'll have to go through some of my old email and
DJA> retrain it. :-)
Well, I got it trained agai
Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
in SpamAssassinTalk on 21-Jul-03 19:31:04 -->
MK> You can get a quick idea by running spamassassin with the debug
MK> output turned on:
(snip)
MK> debug: debug: Only 1 spam(s) in Bayes DB < 200
(snip)
MK> Note that in this example, bayes was disabled becau
At 06:38 PM 7/21/2003 -0600, Daniel J. Andrea II wrote:
Does anyone have any idea what I could be doing wrong here? Or maybe
even a decent "howto" document that walks one through enabling the
bayes database option? Any help would be appreciated.
You can get a quick idea by running spamassassin wi
EMAIL PROTECTED] Xnote Communications
www.xnote.com
- Original Message -
From: "Daniel J. Andrea II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SpamassassinTalkList" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 6:38 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] Bayes problems
> Well, I've had
Well, I've had Spamassassin running for a long time now and really
liked how it's working, except for one thing. I've NEVER had the
Bayes part working in my install. :-/
I've got it installed on a Redhat 9 box. It appears that the bayes
database is being updated by SA when it gets a spam/ham th
20 matches
Mail list logo
