Hi
I update debian to 12 and update SA from 3.4.6 to 4.0.0
In log I found many:
(783172-19) SA info: util: idn_to_ascii: conversion to ACE failed:
'www.domain.ltd__;!!mazxjeg!vqbh5tz39e8ln_21_uyw2gz2tjuzsqclgdasouvzfwy3mdikbepn8uuirxeglnqxiyqtqktdodualfzz9ku-xumlhgra0kmg_tu'
(cha
> Hello, thanks for the post. Firstly, you are wrong about performance of my
> computer - I dont have supercomputer. I didnt run 10 000 000 messages
> through spamc/spamd. In fact the number is 100 000 000 and it means the max.
> size of message I run through spamc/spamd(notice that the number is b
FORMANCE.
He saw the result of the test I
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesBenchmarkResults posted posted,
here is http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesBenchmark explanation of
single parts of the test.
So now, he wants me increase performance of our spamassassin.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Conversion-Spamassassin%28bayes%29-database-to-SDBM-tp32160172p32194013.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 12:30 -0700, monolit wrote:
> I tried to measure performance of Spamassassin by using SDBM databse,
> because of improvement performance. This site
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/BayesBenchmarkResults
> BayesBenchmarkResults claims, that by using SDBM database instead
On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 07:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
monolit939 wrote:
> 2) stop spamassassin
> 3) start spamassassin
> 4) start the script
> #! /bin/bash
> for i in $(ls /path/to/emails); do
> spamc -c -s 1000< $i
> done
>
> The results:
> real 84m55.472s
> user 0m17.145s
> sys 0m34.466s
>
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> firstly, I have to thank for your advices. I added bayes_path
>>>> /var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes to local.cf. I used steps you recommneded
>>>> in
>>>> previous post , BUT I perfor
I have to thank for your advices. I added bayes_path
/var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes to local.cf. I used steps you recommneded
in
previous post , BUT I performed them as user root. I think, that
conversion
from Berkeley DB to SDBM was successful. Unfortunatelly Spamassassin
gives
the same results with B
>>> in your case:
>>> bayes_path /var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes
>>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> firstly, I have to thank for your advices. I added bayes_path
>> /var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes to local.cf. I used steps you recommneded
>> in
&g
/var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes to local.cf. I used steps you recommneded in
previous post , BUT I performed them as user root. I think, that conversion
from Berkeley DB to SDBM was successful. Unfortunatelly Spamassassin gives
the same results with Berkeley DB and SDBM.
I am not sure if Spamassassin r
es_path
/var/mail/.spamassassin/bayes to local.cf. I used steps you recommneded in
previous post , BUT I performed them as user root. I think, that conversion
from Berkeley DB to SDBM was successful. Unfortunatelly Spamassassin gives
the same results with Berkeley DB and SDBM.
I am not sure if Sp
the file
>> has
>> just 77B
>>
>> BUT when I use:
>> su mail -c 'sa-learn --backup > /tmp/bayes_export'
>> I get:
>> ls -l /tmp/bayes_export
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 mail mail 35434634 2011-07-29 15:27 /tmp/bayes_export #the
>> file
>>
* Walter Hurry :
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:44:14 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
>
> > * Walter Hurry :
> >> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> >>
> >> > Using an asynchronous approach using different databases is
> >> > interesting, but as I understand the solution
* David F. Skoll :
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:41:18 +0200
> Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> > That's ~230 msg/sec. Ever took it to 500 msg/sec?
>
> No, we lack the hardware to do that. The 230 msgs/sec rate was
> reached by a customer with a lot more money for hardware than we have. :)
Isn't that th
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:44:14 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> * Walter Hurry :
>> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
>>
>> > Using an asynchronous approach using different databases is
>> > interesting, but as I understand the solution discussed addresses
>> > read
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:41:18 +0200
Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> That's where your product an SA differ, right? SA writes more to
> PostgreSQL e.g. it also stores Bayes tokens in PostgreSQL.
Right.
> That's ~230 msg/sec. Ever took it to 500 msg/sec?
No, we lack the hardware to do that. The 230
* Walter Hurry :
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
>
> > Using an asynchronous approach using different databases is interesting,
> > but as I understand the solution discussed addresses read performace. I
> > am interested in write performance. How far could you tak
* David F. Skoll :
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200
> Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
>
> > I am interested in write performance. How far could
> > you take it before PSQL topped out? Any special hardware in use?
>
> We're not writing very much to PostgreSQL. For each message, we
> write a small
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200
Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> I am interested in write performance. How far could
> you take it before PSQL topped out? Any special hardware in use?
We're not writing very much to PostgreSQL. For each message, we
write a small row containing the internal incide
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:56:03 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> Using an asynchronous approach using different databases is interesting,
> but as I understand the solution discussed addresses read performace. I
> am interested in write performance. How far could you take it before
> PSQL topped o
* David F. Skoll :
> > Claiming SA "ignores large sites" because it doesn't have a complex
> > CDB backend is ridiculous.
>
> I'm not at all claiming SA ignores large sites. I'm claiming that people
> with *your* attitude ("Other 99.9% of user don't really care...") are
> ignoring large sites.
c
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:35:01 +0300
Henrik K wrote:
[...]
> Feel free to donate your code for SA and stop the pointless bashing.
Um? I'm not "bashing" SA. I think it's a fine piece of work. All I asked
is if anyone has made a CDB back-end for SA and I explained why I thought
it might be a goo
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 03:12:40PM -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:02:10 +0300
> Henrik K wrote:
>
> > Let's be serious. Only people that really need it are the ones with a
> > custom high volume distributed spam appliance thing. Other 99.9% of
> > users don't really care if
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:02:10 +0300
Henrik K wrote:
> Let's be serious. Only people that really need it are the ones with a
> custom high volume distributed spam appliance thing. Other 99.9% of
> users don't really care if Bayes lookups take 100ms or whatever. It's
> peanuts compared to other proc
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 01:00:52PM -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
>
> That's why I was wondering if anyone had looked at using CDB with SA's
> Bayes module.
Let's be serious. Only people that really need it are the ones with a custom
high volume distributed spam appliance thing. Other 99.9% of user
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:45:53 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> you need custom code to sync bayes? do expires? or just interesting
> entries in local.cf?
Ah, I should have mentioned we don't use SpamAssassin's Bayes module. We
use our own Bayes implementation.
That's why I was wondering if an
On 7/29/11 12:41 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:31:01 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
ok, but are you using cdb or postgresql for bayes?
cdb for the Bayes data; PostgreSQL for the journal table.
Regards,
David.
you need custom code to sync bayes? do expires? or just intere
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:31:01 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> ok, but are you using cdb or postgresql for bayes?
cdb for the Bayes data; PostgreSQL for the journal table.
Regards,
David.
On 7/29/11 12:20 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
This INSERT-only
operation cannot block under PostgreSQL MVCC.
ok, but are you using cdb or postgresql for bayes?
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
o: 561-999-5000
d: 561-948-2259
>*| *SECNAP Network Security Corporation
* Best Mobile Solutions Product
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:59:14 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> in mysql, we don't journal. what does that journaling time do to SA
> processing times? Id hate to think we go from 1 s/email processing
> time to 60 seconds or something while journal is locked.
Journalling *improves* training spee
On 7/29/11 11:47 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
CDB is*very* fast. If you journal your Bayes training and run the
journal every 5-10 minutes, CDB can easily keep up even with a 2GB
Bayes database.
in mysql, we don't journal. what does that journaling time do to SA
processing times? Id hate to thin
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:36:52 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> On 7/29/11 11:33 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > Has anyone investigated writing a CDB backend for SpamAssassin's
> > Bayes implementation? I'm guessing the need to rewrite the DB each
> > time makes it a bit complex.
> esp for people
On 7/29/11 11:33 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
Has anyone investigated writing a CDB backend for SpamAssassin's Bayes
implementation? I'm guessing the need to rewrite the DB each time makes
it a bit complex.
esp for people with 2gb db's?
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
o: 561-999-5000
d: 561-948-2259
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:26:57 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> if you use mysql.pm for other things (sql params, user's, etc), it
> still doesn't seem to make sense to use sdbm AND mysql.
We use PostgreSQL for a number of things, but we found that CDB is
much faster than all competitors for Bayes
Can this really be true?
On 7/29/11 5:28 AM, Axb wrote:
On 2011-07-29 11:14, monolit939 wrote:
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin
database can
its not just faster than DB, but faster the innodb/mysql.pm?
one of the things I like about innodb/mysql.pm i
p > /tmp/bayes_export'
I get:
ls -l /tmp/bayes_export
-rw-r--r-- 1 mail mail 35434634 2011-07-29 15:27 /tmp/bayes_export #the file
has more than 35MB!
So it appears spamc is running as user mail.
Execute the conversion instructions as user "mail", either by "su - mail"
to th
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to
SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with
conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&
:14, monolit939 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin
>>>>>> database
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> increase performanc
format to
SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with
conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&rev=1269508492
guide , but it describes solution
ssassin
>>>> database
>>>> can
>>>> increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to
>>>> SDBM
>>>> format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with
>>>> conversion
>>>> of stand
some experience with
conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&rev=1269508492
guide , but it describes solution for mailscanner...
stop spamd
sa-learn --backup>
to ask you if somebody has some experience with
>> conversion
>> of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
>>
>> I have found just this
>> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&rev=1269508492
>> guide , bu
to ask you if somebody has some experience with
>> conversion
>> of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
>>
>> I have found just this
>> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:anti_spam:spamassassin:bayes:sdbm&rev=1269508492
>> guide , bu
On 2011-07-29 11:14, monolit939 wrote:
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin database can
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with conversion
of standard
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin database can
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin database can
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin database can
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
Hello,
I have found test which says the change of type of Spamassassin database can
increase performance almost three times (from Berkeley DB format to SDBM
format). I want to ask you if somebody has some experience with conversion
of standard Spamassassin bayes database.
I have found just this
So much for your stupid whitelist:
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4,
I am setting the score to 0 for this stupid rule.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
SECNAP Network Security Corporation
Keep up to date with latest information on IT security: Real time
security alerts:
http://www.secnap.com/news
_
You can try to use [b]SuperDVD Video Editor[/b] - http://www.alldj.com,It's a
free software,But it's very powerful.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Conversion-tf2632378.html#a11683573
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Jack Gostl wrote:
> I feel stupid. I found the answer. It was the --import function on
> sa-learn. Is there a REAME file someplace? I installed this through
> perl's CPAN interface. I don't have anything that provides general
> background.
http://spamassassin.apache.org/doc.html
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jack Gostl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "spam"
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: Conversion
Jack Gostl wrote:
I've just done a trial conversion from spamassassin 3.0.3 to 3.1.7 and
the bayes return codes aren't being
Jack Gostl wrote:
> I've just done a trial conversion from spamassassin 3.0.3 to 3.1.7 and
> the bayes return codes aren't being set. I should point out that this
> is a "new" machine, and its entirely possible that I missed moving
> something.
>
>
I've just done a trial conversion from spamassassin 3.0.3 to
3.1.7 and the bayes return codes aren't being set. I should point out that this
is a "new" machine, and its entirely possible that I missed moving
something.
I installed the various CPAN pre-reqs, installed
Tim Rosmus wrote:
> I've been running multiple in/out servers using Bayes and the local
> Bayes DB storage on the local machine[s]. Now I am moving Bayes
> to a site wide SQL setup. My question is on the sa-learn backup/
> restore from DB to SQL...
>
> Should I backup/restore all local machine
I've been running multiple in/out servers using Bayes and the local
Bayes DB storage on the local machine[s]. Now I am moving Bayes
to a site wide SQL setup. My question is on the sa-learn backup/
restore from DB to SQL...
Should I backup/restore all local machine Bayes DB's to the central
SQL
Upgrade question 2.64 > 3.1.0
Can anyone shed some light on a basic upgrade question:
I am upgrading from a 2.64 version to 3.10 I have AWL running
(site wide) and am unclear how the upgrade will handle the existing
auto-whitelist.pag file? In fact it looks like by default the new
version
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 12:18:37PM -0400, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> Just wondering if anyone has already written anything good for interfacing
> to MySQL for managing the tables that SA uses. Particularly for the
> userpref part of it...
You've seen the wiki right?
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassas
Just wondering if anyone has already written anything good for interfacing
to MySQL for managing the tables that SA uses. Particularly for the
userpref part of it...
TIA
--
Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have .0.
happened but none stranger than this. Does y
Hopefully someone can shed some light on this. I have one server with some
good sized bayes databases on it that I am trying to copy over to another
server.
The files are Berkeley DB Hash files, version 8. One of the servers I want
to use this database on apparently has an older version of the Be
59 matches
Mail list logo
