Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Kristopher Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
We have found Bayes to be more trouble than it's worth. We were
frequently running into problems keeping the database stable and fresh.
We have a site-wide install so that just made it all the more
problematic.
We also have a site-wide install with Bayes (15.000 Users). Where is
the problem with "keeping the database stable and fresh"? Never
crashed here.
I have been running sitewide bayes since the beginning without much
maintenance at all. It has autolearned every message itself and its
dead on balls accurate. I've trained maybe 20 message total manually so
i dont see how running bayes could actually cause more work for an admin
unless its been trained poorly and they have to correct it. Even then
its probably just easier to delete it and start over.
I tag spam at 5.0 and have bayes BAYES_99 at 5.4. This one rule alone
is enough to mark spam and i havent had any false positives because of
it yet.
-Jim
