If a filter is skipped by SKIPIFWEIGHT, at that point I am not concerned about logging that filter, as I do not want it to run. Remember, SKIPIFWEIGHT is only for filters.
However, what if a message gets a high weight early, but then would get a negative weight from a filter? You took action before the message had a chance to get the negative weight. What if you are checking to see the effectiveness of one test compared to others? If processing is stopped short, that test may not be run on all messages. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Clarification > > John- > > Doesn't SKIPIFWEIGHT also defeat the logging of the skipped tests? > > -Dave Doherty > Skywaves, Inc. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Tolmachoff (Lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:04 PM > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Clarification > > > > I would like to see the SKIPIFWEIGHT option removed. If we had a > > conditional option to stop when a specific weight is reached, then there > > would be not need for SKIPIFWEIGHT. In addition, why would anyone use > > SKIPIFWEIGHT on less than every test...and why would anyone define one > > test with a different SKIPIFWEIGHT value than another test? This leads > > me back to a HOLDIFWEIGHT/DELETEIFWEIGHT logic which optionally stops > > processing when reached. > > Coming in late some my comments may be off. > > Scott has stated before that to stop all processing once a certain weight > has been reached would be difficult and/or problematic. That is where > SKIPIFWEIGHT comes in. I use SKIPIFWEIGHT on all body filters, as those > are > the most expensive in terms of CPU cost. I then have body filters listed > in > order, from most effective to least effective or specific target. Example, > I > have a custom body filter on my server for one client only. That is the > last > filter to run. > > Also, another reason to not stop processing is if you are doing log > analysis > and adjust filters or blocks based on that analysis. If you stop > processing > at say 35, but the message would have failed 5 other tests, those tests > will > then not show up in log analysis. > > John Tolmachoff > Engineer/Consultant/Owner > eServices For You > > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > > > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
