Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:32:03PM +0200, Steve wrote:
>   
>> Hallo Tom,
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Steve schreef:
>>>       
>>>> I see a bunch of issues:
>>>>
>>>> 1) You should NOT use SBPH with MySQL driver. The only driver able to
>>>>         
>>> handle SBPH without issues is the hash driver. Please use something else 
>>> then
>>> SBPH. I would suggest OSB.
>>>       
>>> There seem to be multiple issues with some of these configuration
>>> options, notably combintaaions between Algorithm, Tokenizer and the
>>> various storage drivers. Maybe dspam could check for these and exit with
>>> a "configuration error" when incompatible choices are made?
>>>
>>>       
>> They are not incompatible by definition. It is more a technical limitation 
>> then a real hard incompatibility. I understand that a "configuration error" 
>> would be nice and dandy but where to start and where to stop? I mean what 
>> conditions do trap a "configuration error" and which one are not going to 
>> trap a "configuration error"? The possibilities for making errors in the 
>> configuration are endless and a procedure to check them all would be huge. 
>> Hard configuration errors are anyway trapped and DSPAM will refuse to 
>> run/work/process/whatever if you set some options. But the above mentioned 
>> condition is more or less a technical limitation and as time passes it could 
>> be easily happen that a new release of the RDBMS could cope with the load of 
>> SBPH.
>> I personally would not extend the current code to check each and every 
>> (stupid) combination of options. Some things are better left to be done 
>> outside by humans then internally by code. But that's my personal opinion. I 
>> don't own DSPAM. It's a tool for us all. If the majority of the user base 
>> would like to have that extended error checking then we could look to 
>> implement it in the next release after 3.9.0. Depending on how the checking 
>> is done it could be however that the checking is going to eat some 
>> processing time when using DSPAM. For me that would be a big no-go. I am all 
>> for trapping hard configuration errors but leaving the soft configuration 
>> errors to be resolved by the user/admin using DSPAM.
>>     
>
> I also agree that we should minimize big-brother coding unless it will
> actually be a fatal problem. For example, sbph being restricted to the
> hash driver would make it more difficult to work on making sbph work
> with standard SQL drivers.
>
>   


Indeed.

IMHO, the best way to avoid possible conflicting configurations is 
through documentation, and that only.

R's,

Hugo Monteiro.

-- 
ci.fct.unl.pt:~# cat .signature

Hugo Monteiro
Email    : [email protected]
Telefone : +351 212948300 Ext.15307
Web      : http://hmonteiro.net

Centro de Informática
Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da
                   Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Quinta da Torre   2829-516 Caparica   Portugal
Telefone: +351 212948596   Fax: +351 212948548
www.ci.fct.unl.pt             [email protected]

ci.fct.unl.pt:~# _


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Dspam-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspam-user

Reply via email to