Alex Woick wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>> That said, I think the AWL is a great idea, but not ready for production
>> use on servers with reasonable mail volume. I say that because it
>> completely lacks any kind of useful (ie: atime based) expiry mechanism.
>> The only way to prune the AWL database is by hitcount, using the
>> check_whitelist script from the tools directory of the source tarball
>>
> Not neccessarily. Put your awl on a sql database and add a timestamp
> column to the awl table, which gets automagically a new timestamp by
> the dbms each time a record is updated. The "timestamp" column type in
> Mysql is such a type.
>
Fair enough, with end-user add-ons and the use of SQL, the AWL can be
made production ready. However, out-of-the-box, it's not.
