poifgh wrote:
>
>
>
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=spamassassin+sought
>>
> :-D - Thnx
>
>
Other than the sought rules, all the rules are manually generated? Is there
any statistics on how frequentl
Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
>
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=spamassassin+sought
>
:-D - Thnx
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/SpamAssassin-Ruleset-Generation-tp25773508p25776303.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RW-15 wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 11:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
> poifgh wrote:
>
>>
>> I have a question about - understanding how are rulesets generated for
>> ...
>> a. Is it done manually with people writing regex to see how
>> efficiently they captu
I have a question about - understanding how are rulesets generated for
spamassassin.
For example - consider the rule in 20_drugs.cf :
header SUBJECT_DRUG_GAP_C Subject =~
/\bc.{0,2}i.{0,2}a.{0,2}l.{0,2}i.{0,2}s\b/i
describe SUBJECT_DRUG_GAP_C Subject contains a gappy version of 'cialis
Bowie Bailey wrote:
>
> For auto-learning, the high and low scoring messages are fed to Bayes.
> However, for an optimal setup, you should manually train Bayes on as
> much of your (verified) ham and spam as possible. The more of your mail
> stream Bayes sees, the better the results will be.
>
I am trying to understand inner workings of spam assassin and would be great
if someone can answer my questions. I have read online documentation but
there are still some questions left unanswered or I am not sure about.
As far as I understand, the default configuration of spamassassin processes
I am trying to understand inner workings of spam assassin and would be great
if someone can answer my questions. I have read online documentation but
there are still some questions left unanswered or I am not sure about.
As far as I understand, the default configuration of spamassassin processes
1:55:21PM -0700, poifgh wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was measuring how quickly could SA [spam assassin] process spams when
>> several SA processes are run in parallel over separate mbox files. I used
>> a
>> 8 core machine. Below are the numbers when I forked d
I havent tried with sa-compile yet - I can give it a shot
--
Henrik K wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:41:47AM -0700, poifgh wrote:
>>
>> Henrik K wrote:
>> >
>> > Yeah, given that my 4x3Ghz box masscheck peaks at 22 msgs/sec, without
>> >
about 22 msgs/sec for 1 fork and
50 msgs/sec for 8 fork
Thnx everyone for helping out.
--
Henrik K wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:41:47AM -0700, poifgh wrote:
>
>
> I did not say it was a problem. I was just wondering how fast CPU/memory
> you
> have, since my 3Gh
t; - or happily, work make my contributions here limited.
>
> I'd be interested in the results of this though.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Nigel
>
> PS - apologies if I'm repeating prior observations.
>
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 10:41:47 -0700 (PDT), poifgh
>
Henrik K wrote:
>
> Yeah, given that my 4x3Ghz box masscheck peaks at 22 msgs/sec, without
> Net/AWL/Bayes. But that's the 3.3 SVN ruleset.. wonder what version was
> used
> and any nondefault rules/settings? Certainly sounds strange that 1 core
> could top out the same. Anyone else have figure
c. r. wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:55:21PM -0700, poifgh wrote:
>> Why am I not seeing a linear increase in the throughput?
>> Is a file locking creating the bottleneck?
>
> Maybe the auto white list.
>
> --
>
I can try turning off AWL and ge
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2009-07-30 at 23:55 -0700, poifgh wrote:
> [...]
>> I ran freshly build SA with Bayes and DNSBL turned off. Why am I not
>> seeing
>> a linear increase in the throughput? Is a file locking creating the
> Because the bottleneck
Henrik K wrote:
>
> Yeah, given that my 4x3Ghz box masscheck peaks at 22 msgs/sec, without
> Net/AWL/Bayes. But that's the 3.3 SVN ruleset.. wonder what version was
> used
> and any nondefault rules/settings? Certainly sounds strange that 1 core
> could top out the same. Anyone else have figure
Hi
I was measuring how quickly could SA [spam assassin] process spams when
several SA processes are run in parallel over separate mbox files. I used a
8 core machine. Below are the numbers when I forked different number of
processes.
Fork = 8;
Rate = 57 msgs/sec
Fork = 4;
Rate = 44 msgs/sec
Fo
16 matches
Mail list logo
