On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 08:30:19PM -0700, Robert Menschel wrote: > a) For those of us not intimately familiar with the numeric values of > date/time in perl, what --after value would bring us to Jan 1 2005?
Hrm. 1041397200 was 1/1/03. +365 days is 1072933200, which was 1/1/04. +366 days is 1104555600, which was 1/1/05. :) > b) I am concerned that starting a full rescoring mass-check against a > large corpus will take longer than allowed. I'll have to abort, and > send in what I have, but "what I have" will be the results generated I'd suggest letting it run for a little bit and estimate out how many messages you can run through in the time allotted. I'm doing the same thing. It's not 100%, but after 15-30 minutes you should be able to multiply out and determine the # of messages you can run through (I leave some wiggle room of 1-2 days), then restart the mass-check with that many messages. > for older emails, not newer emails. Would it be appropriate to have > mass-check process emails newest to oldest? No. It needs to go in order, oldest to newest for Bayes. -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way." - Jessica Rabbit
pgpuUyXkAk5lA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
