On 7/22/2010 10:47 AM, Michael Scheidell wrote: > On 7/22/10 10:32 AM, Eric A. Hall wrote: >> Sometimes the AWL rule doesn't appear in the list. From looking at the >> > due to performance vs accuracy issues, AWL was demoted in SA 3.3x. > > It might not be worth the cpu cycles > Slight Correction: The above could be (mis)read to imply inaccuracy, which is not why it was demoted.
It was demoted for limited accuracy improvement compared to the amount of disk load it adds. The AWL might be better if it had an expiry mechanism, which would mitigate some of the performance hit. See: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6059
