I've been using the AWL with no problems for a little over a week now. I
just wanted to mention this in reply to my earlier "it's broken" message.
I dunno what the problem was before. I don't think it was one.
My AWL database is rapidly getting big. It's up to 23MB and growing.
Any suggestions for how to keep it from growing without bound? Obviously
it gets more useful the more info it has - perhaps some way to harvest
senders who have sent under a certain number of messages, and have been
idle for a certain period of time? Obviously it would need to keep a
timestamp as well.
I see paired entries in the database:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] = 6
[EMAIL PROTECTED]|totscore = 34.98
What do these both mean?
Another few AWL thoughts:
Distributed AWL. This is mostly interesting to me because I have a few
mail servers. The politics of sharing an AWL with others are more
complicated than I want to think about. (This wouldn't be hard).
Domain-based AWL, instead of E-mail address-based? I'm not sure about this
one - on the one hand, I get nothing but spam from some domains (I try to
just block them at the MTA, but don't catch them in the first few hours),
but some domains are pretty mixed. (yahoo, aol, hotmail).
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Craig Hughes wrote:
> Charlie, I think some of the DB formats pre-allocate space in their
> datafiles -- is it possible they just didn't zero the bytes out or
> something? What happens when you run tools/check_whitelist?
>
> C
>
> on 2/20/02 11:25 AM, Charlie Watts at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On 19 Feb 2002, Craig Hughes wrote:
> >
> >> Ok, it's done. That was the last thing on the list to get done before a
> >> 2.1 release, so now I think I'll go ahead and release in a day or two
> >> (after people have a chance to notice that the new stuff is broken).
> >
> > I updated after getting your message yesterday, and it's been running
> > since last night with -a.
> >
> > However, spamd just died on me for the first time in months.
> >
> > I've restarted it without the -a flag; I'll let this run a few days, and
> > then try again with -a (and -D).
> >
> > Looking at the auto-whitelist.db file, it's broken ... here's a snippet
> > from it:
> >
> > ^B
> > <EE> <ED> <CF> <CE> <AB> <AA> <88> <85> <AF<85>
> > nless(defined(&SY
> > S_yield)) {
> > sub SYS_yield () { 321;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS_thr_sleep)) {
> > sub SYS_thr_sleep () { 322;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS_thr_wakeup)) {
> > sub SYS_thr_wakeup () { 323;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS_mlockall)) {
> > sub SYS_mlockall () { 324;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS_munlockall)) {
> > sub SYS_munlockall () { 325;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS___getcwd)) {
> > sub SYS___getcwd () { 326;}
> > }
> > unless(defined(&SYS_sched_setparam)) {
> > sub SYS_sched_setparam () { 327;}
> >
> > I've never seen anything like that in a .db before.
> >
> > And this was also in the auto-whitelist.db file:
> >
> > l2tp 115 L2TP # Layer Two Tunneling Protocol
> > ddx 116 DDX # D-II Data Exchange
> > iatp 117 IATP # Interactive Agent Transfer Protocol
> > st 118 ST # Schedule Transfer
> > srp 119 SRP # SpectraLink Radio Protocol
> > uti 120 UTI # UTI
> > smp 121 SMP # Simple Message Protocol
> > sm 122 SM # SM
> > ptp 123 PTP # Performance Transparency Protocol
> > isis 124 ISIS # ISIS over IPv4
> > fire 125 FIRE
> >
> >
> > But I don't see how the code could have done that. So obviously the stack
> > got broken. Perhaps some locking interaction? Perhaps it's a fluke ...
>
>
--
Charlie Watts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frontier Internet, Inc.
http://www.frontier.net/
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
