On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Paul Murphy wrote: > the whole area of database locking for Bayes and AWL is a mess.
Indeed. :-) But doesn't SA 3.0 support flock()-style locking? (I haven't looked at the code.) > The solution is to use a proper database - the latest SA has support > for MySQL, which will be much more stable and on large databases > will also probably be faster. Pros and cons. I'm not sure I consider MySQL to be a "proper" database. :-) (We use PostgreSQL in our commercial products, though it has its annoyances too.) PostgreSQL actually uses MVCC rather than locking, so readers are never blocked by a writer. However, any semi-decent SQL database probably has a more robust locking mechanism than SA's Perl code, and has the huge advantage of being easily shared among several mail scanners. I think a Berkeley DB will still beat a SQL database quite handily for raw data access (at least for the access patterns used to look up Bayes tokens.) Regards, David. _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
