On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 11:17:09AM -0800, Craig Hughes wrote: > On Tue, 2002-03-05 at 09:35, Matt Sergeant wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Yevgeniy Miretskiy wrote: > > > > > The question is: why do I need to run all tests if I'm running spamassassin with >-L flag? > > > > Again, sorry if this topic was beaten to death before... > > > The problem is that some of the scores are negative, not positive. > > > > However a way around this has just occured to me: > > > > 1. Run all negatively scoring tests. > > > > 2. Run positively scoring tests in highest-score first order. > > > > 3. Stop when we hit the threshold. > > Matt, take a look at bugzilla #62 -- there is more discussion of exactly > this there. If you re-order the rules, then the only problem with > short-circuit scoring is razor submission. If "-L" is used though, this > is irrelevant, you can just exit when the threshold is exceeded. It > would probably be good to indicate that score evaluation was > short-circuited in some header or other (probably just tack on the > X-Spam-Status) so people don't get confused. Also, you'll want to make > sure none of the "make test" stuff needs adjusting for the new scores > some of the mails will get. >
How bout a command line option for short-circuiting? That way spamassassin -t, etc wouldn't short circuit. I think that it might be best to do the sorting at startup, so perhaps this would be best in spamd only!? -- Duncan Findlay _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
