I ran some quick macros on the current RATWARE test and came up with the attached "20_ratware.cf" file with each mailer in its own rule. I haven't included scores - perhaps this could be thrown into the next GA run if it's worthwhile.
-- michael moncur mgm at starlingtech.com http://www.starlingtech.com/ "We forfeit three-fourths of ourselves to be like other people." -- Arthur Schopenhauer > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Craig > R Hughes > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 10:32 PM > To: Daniel Pittman > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Re: RATWARE rule and manual vs. GA scores > > > Daniel Pittman wrote: > > DP> Break the rule up into individual tests for the different > email packages > DP> and let it run. Aside from the better scoring for what is and isn't a > DP> real mail package, this will probably run faster in many cases as a > DP> simple string match, not a regexp, is used. > > Probably right. All the same logic applies to PORN_3 too, and I > want to break > that one up, but of course PORN_3 is trickier because of the > triple-repeat part. > PORN_3 is far and away the worst performing rule in the book. > Fully 10% of the > execution time per message is being consumed by testing PORN_3. > > C > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply > the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > Spamassassin-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk >
20_ratware.cf
Description: Binary data
