On 2024-05-18 at 10:26:54 UTC-0400 (Sat, 18 May 2024 16:26:54 +0200)
Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay <r...@med-lo.eu>
is rumored to have said:
Is there any difference between using spamc -L and sa-learn ?
On 18.05.24 11:41, Bill Cole wrote:
Yes. The compiled-C spamc binary loads no Perl, it just talks over a
socket to spamd, which is always running and so always has the
advantage of a warmed-up i/o cache and a permanently loaded set of
Perl code objects pre-compiled and in RAM; sa-learn has to open and
compile all of the needed SA Perl code on every launch.
I noticed that the later is way slower.
Yes, it is. It is quite expensive to execute perl and have it load the
many SpamAssassin modules needed to learn a message.
note that in order for spamc -L to work, spamd must be run with "-l" option
which allows learning/reporting.
Also, those two may use different databases - sa-learn uses by default
$HOME/.spamassassin/ (of calling user), spamd depends on how it's run - it
must run as root and - you need to pass it "-H" parameter without specifying
directory, to use $HOME/.spamassassin/ of user specified by spamc
Otherwise you need to configure SA to use SQL or LDAP config so they will
use the same.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
We are but packets in the Internet of life (userfriendly.org)
