On 2017-11-01 14:31, RW wrote:
On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:44:20 -0000
Kevin Golding wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2017 22:35:08 -0000, David Gessel
<ges...@blackrosetech.com> wrote:
> 1) sa-learn seems really, really slow. Slow enough that spam
> sometimes comes in faster. This seems far slower than the
> benchmark results suggest is within the range of normal. I'm sure
> I'm doing something really wrong, but not sure what.
sa-learn is more suited to individual or small batches of messages.
You'll get significantly improved performance using spamc -L spam (or
ham, or forget).
Aside from the fact that the OP is not using spamd, it's the the other
way around.
sa-learn is inefficient for training emails one at a time because of
the overhead of repeating the initialization, but it is efficient if
you run it on a large mailbox.
It is when I run it on a large mailbox that it takes what seems like too
long to complete (at least a week for 4,000 message mailbox). I've
almost certainly configured something wrong/weird. The rate is way, way
below what it should be. A hint that suggests it isn't any sort of
processing performance issue is that CPU load barely registers for
perl/sa-learn. I'm certainly not certain, but I suspect there's some
sort of lock/unlock thing happening - perhaps on the maildir, perhaps on
the token db which is stalling the script (line 511 perhaps?) - which is
seriously constipating the process.
