On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 10:46:09PM +0200, Morten Isaksen wrote:
>
> I have updated the sql/README file.
>
Thanks,
I saw your update to the wiki earlier and was actually contemplating a
similar change, which I've now made and checked in.
Thanks Again,
Michael
On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 10:58:45PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> I was really hoping rc2 would be it, but I'm thinking with the 3735 fix
> we should do an rc3 for good measure. If so, I'd like to get it out on
> Wednesday morning/afternoon (we can prep a tarball on Tuesday evening
> for testing)
All tests pass.
+1 for release
Michael
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 12:31:22PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Change #1. Have failover options for the MySQL db option (For that matter
> and supported DBs). We got burned by this today, not a major loss, but we
> cant communicate to the db for a time. This could be just an additional
+1 for rc1 release.
Michael
On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 11:03:57AM -0300, Henry Stern wrote:
> I really like your latest submission, but the negative kerning between
> the m and the A really turns me off. Does anyone else feel this way?
>
Agreed, I like them, but would rather have the m and A at the same
spacing as the other
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 07:17:25AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> This command used to display tokens. Now it displays just numbers. Is
> there any way to get the text back? This used to be interesting to look
> at every now and then for rule ideas.
Assuming you're talking about v3.0.0
The num
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:37:05AM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Next time around, why don't we use C-T-R for masses/ and
> rules/50_scores.cf when we're in this phase of development? Only switch
> to full-tree R-T-C after the scores are in the tree.
>
> It seems C-T-R is more appropriate for ma
On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 08:08:57PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes:
>
> > [X] I vote against the creation of this list
>
> As stated, I'm not in favor of the list: (a) I believe the list needs to
> be non-archived, (b) the list of ASF members who are su
Can you update:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3506
With relevant info and what not, so we can track it via the PR.
Thanks
Michael
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:02:53AM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
> Where does the 'PR' and 'P' prefixes come from in the SPAMD response??
> I don't see anywhere in spamd.raw where it prints anything but SPAMD/1.X
>
Shot in the dark, I wonder if it's some sort of corruption thing.
Could the 'PR
On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 10:29:30AM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>
> I suggest we roll a pre4 release and allow people to submit mass-check
> logs with either pre3 or pre4 (recommending pre4).
>
+1
Michael
ls a
> > Mail::SpamAssassin::CmdLearn->new() construct instead of running sa-learn.
>
> That certainly makes sense ;)
>
Or just make calls directly into the API, that is what it is there for
afterall.
Something like this
Michael
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
# Copyright 2004 Michael
On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 12:10:05PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Note: I'm not against the idea of making the change, I'm against this
> > being considered "trivial" and committed without comment by the rest of
> > the dev team.
>
> Well, reason
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 11:04:47AM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
> Apparently, the apache wiki folks have a patch that can be enabled which
> requires that a Wiki page editor have a UserPreferences account before
> they can change a page.
+1 on turning it on for SA wiki.
Michael
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 07:48:02PM +0200, Johannes russek wrote:
>
> ah, okay. the windows guys. a pure perl interface would of course be very
> platform
> independent, but i wonder if the performance impact would be big or not, as
> performance might be an important issue for the ones using spamc
+1
Michael
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 03:26:02PM -0500, Dallas L. Engelken wrote:
>
> The only thing that doesn't work with SQL prefs is defining new rules..
>
> Body, header, full, etc. You can change the describe and score via SQL,
> but for some reason, new rules cannot be read in from SQL due to the
> tim
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 06:09:02PM +0100, Tim Bishop wrote:
> (Should this RFE be put into bugzilla?)
>
Yes please.
>
> Looking at this from a SpamAssassin point of view the changes required
> to do this would be purely in the Conf/SQL.pm, which is quite self
> contained. Granted it would break
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 04:37:08PM +0200, Johannes russek wrote:
> hi michael.
> maybe you're right about a pure perl implementation, but for me it seems
> that writing a perl extension to libspamc is way less time consuming, for
> example all that ssl stuff needs to be reprogrammed.
> anyway, most
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:23:01PM +0200, Johannes russek wrote:
> hello everybody.
> is libspamc currently under active development?
Yes
> am i the only one that is interested in having such a functionality, or is
> even someone else doing this right now?
I think it would be more useful to have
+1
Michael
Howdy,
I've adapted my bayes benchmark[1] to allow me to compare a run
between 2.63 and 3.0, testing just the bayes learning, scanning,
forgetting stuffs.
I found a few interesting things, I rarely offer concrete conclusions
based on data I generate, this case is no different, so feel free to
tak
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 12:08:57PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> How about a slight modification?
>
> "Migrate data from older version/non DB_File based databases"
>
> I don't think there's going to be a real solution for the short doc line,
> but the larger section below in the docs can exp
I think this will be an echo of what's already been said, but thought
I would give my $.02 anyway.
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 12:06:16AM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So, given the performance numbers for Bayes when Digest::SHA1 is not
> > present an
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:29:26PM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 03:22:36PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 07:12:59PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Bug 3526: modify description of --import switch to be cleare
Can you please define snapshot. Have you tried -pre1?
Sounds like this bug:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3334
Possibly it still exists. If you are indeed using -pre1 or at least a
revision >= 21432 please submit a proper Bugzilla bug.
Michael
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 11:04:24AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael Parker wrote:
>
> >There is an upgrade path for DBM files to
> >the new hash format
>
> Yes, that's better phrasing for what I meant. It won't make a difference
> to anyone who has n
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 10:36:31AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
> If we would want to save the fraction of a percent that switching from
> SHA-1 to FNV-1 would give us, now is the time, because everyone
> upgrading to version 3.0 will have to recreate their Bayes db with the
> new hash keys
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 07:28:21PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
>
> Any preference as to when I should move the project?
>
I'm fine with anytime, what I can't switch I'll diff and patch.
Michael
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 05:34:28PM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> 2) can you do a similar profile for a spam filtering run, rather than
> sa-learn?
This is from a spamassassin -L on 2000 ham msgs:
Total Elapsed Time = 631.9578 Seconds
User+System Time = 418.8978 Seconds
Exclusive Times
%Time
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 11:00:47PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>
> I think the bigger performance issue is given the frequency with which
> we call the SHA1 routine (about 420 times per message for this data set)
> is to _avoid that extra function call_.
>
> Also, the time per call is not measur
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 05:34:28PM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael,
>
> I have two questions. 1) What do the numbers show? How much will we save
> if the hash function is twice as fast as SHA-1? Five times as fast?
I'm not really a profiling expert, Daniel might have better insight.
I d
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 03:22:36PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 07:12:59PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Bug 3526: modify description of --import switch to be clearer
> > + --import Migrate data from non DB_File based
> > databases
>
> Hrm
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 05:34:58PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 02:21:54PM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
> > Post-incubator-graduation, do we want to migrate to ASF bug tracking
> > infrastructure? And if so, which? An ASF bugzilla (which if I recall
> > correctly we'd pre
Howdy,
The nightly-version.txt file has these lines in it for the past couple
of nights/days:
2004-06-20 21494M
2004-06-21 21529M
This is causing at least my run-corpora script to fail.
Did someone modify whatever tree that comes from directly? Can it be
cleaned up? or should I fix m
On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 01:08:47PM -0700, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> Are we going to put out a -pre1 release?
>
Yes, I think we should do one ASAP. Do we need permission from the
incubator for pre-releases?
Michael
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 05:56:29AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: jm
> Date: Thu Jun 17 22:56:28 2004
> New Revision: 21408
>
> Added:
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/spamc/version.h.pl (contents, props changed)
> Modified:
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/MANIFEST
>incubator/s
On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 12:25:07AM +0100, Tim Bishop wrote:
>
> I guess this email is just for information really, unless someone steps
> up and finds a bug in SpamAssassin/Perl to attribute this problem to :-)
> I'd certainly recommend people use MySQL over Postgresql at this stage.
>
For what
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 05:41:24PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>
[ SNIP ]
>
I'm +1 on the new schedule.
The sooner the better.
Michael
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 06:27:25PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> 3082 nor auto-whitelist database needs expiry
>
> this is really an enhancement, and isn't complete enough for 3.0 imho. 3.1.0.
>
Agreed, I've got a 90% of the way there design, but no code, it
probably something we want to
On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 10:51:38PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> -firsttrusted hits in a correctly configured setting (counting Michael
> Parker as misconfigured, although I'm not sure whether it's a trusted
> networks guessing problem that we should be able to guess or not, bu
I don't know that it's a hard and fast rule, but it's certainly a
convention folks have been following for awhile.
When taking a bug in Bugzilla, please go ahead and make sure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is in the CC list. That way bug
discussion is out in the open.
Michael
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 01:01:08AM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:33:48PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> >
> > 1. We should probably not truncate tokens (at least not so much) since
> >we're hashing now. Some amount of truncation may still
On Mon, May 03, 2004 at 02:08:04AM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Maybe we're truncating too much prior to the SHA1 step because that
> seems like a wash at best. Of course, computing SHA1 over longer text
> will be a bit slower, but I don't think it will be significant.
Currently we aren't trunc
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:33:48PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
>
> 1. We should probably not truncate tokens (at least not so much) since
>we're hashing now. Some amount of truncation may still be helpful,
>though, so a 10fcv would be a good idea.
>Um, I don't recall anyone posting
On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 09:09:27PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Sun, May 02, 2004 at 05:39:14PM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> > I'm contemplating limiting bayes tokens to 128 chars, in the tokenize
> > method. Anyone see a problem with that?
>
> Am I missing so
I'm contemplating limiting bayes tokens to 128 chars, in the tokenize
method. Anyone see a problem with that?
My current bayes DB has 17 tokens > 128 and they all look like they
are either poison tokens or from uuencoded/base64 msgs, in other words
garbage.
Michael
A word of warning to folks following the SVN releases. As of r10394
the bayes database has moved from v2 to v3. This means that once
installed you won't be able to downgrade to an earlier version of SA.
Michael
Just a warning to folks who are currently making use of the Bayes SQL
storage.
I just checked in a major update that changed the database table
structure. Unlike the DBM storage there is no on the fly upgrade
capability. Therefore if you are interested in keeping your current
data you must take
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 12:37:14PM -0700, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
> > don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
> > (which it looks like they don't), doe
On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 03:13:02PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Seeing the wiki updates about saproxy got me thinking ... If they
> don't have a free version available, and they don't use our bugzilla
> (which it looks like they don't), does anyone have an issue if I blow
> away the "saproxy"
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 09:08:28AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
> When I suggested making the atime in Bayes two bytes instead of four by
> making it coarser grained than one second, somebody (Justin?) said that
> it had been tried and produced problems in handling expiry.
>
> Can whoever k
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 04:36:12PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 03:07:21PM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Curious, should the atimes be updated before calculating the expire
> > delta?
>
> Umm. It depends? ;)
>
> The problem I was t
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 07:47:56PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: felicity
> Date: Thu Apr 22 12:47:55 2004
> New Revision: 10185
>
> Modified:
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore.pm
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore/DBM.pm
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 10:33:09AM -0500, Michael Parker wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:30:24AM -0700, Matt Thoene wrote:
> > I'm not finding it in the documentation anywhere...how do I implement
> > the URIDNSBL plugin for 3.0?
>
> perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Plug
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:30:24AM -0700, Matt Thoene wrote:
> I'm not finding it in the documentation anywhere...how do I implement
> the URIDNSBL plugin for 3.0?
perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin
Michael
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 12:26:12PM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> >Adding a binary version to our module should be pretty easy.
>
> Ok, it's checked in. There is now a function
> Mail::SpamAssassin::SHA1::sha1bin that is exported along with
> Mail::SpamAssassin::SHA1::s
We currently have a hex version of the SHA1 hash, but don't have
anything for the binary version. Anyone have something that we can
use for that? The flip side would be just going ahead and making
Digest::SHA1 a required module.
Michael
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 11:35:06PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
>
> 04/22: feature freeze -- no more adding enhancements to 3.0 w/out vote
>
I have 2 features I'd like to get in but won't quite have them
finished by 4/22.
1) Bayes Optimizations - 90% done
It includes a db version change, beg
My vote is Wednesday with a 14:00 PDT start time.
Michael
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:15:13AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael Parker wrote:
> >Question is, is using that value gonna work in the long run
> >for dbs with 3-4 million tokens?
>
> substr(sha1($token), -5) and CHAR(5) is good to about 2 million using my
>
I absolutely suck at math so I'm not even gonna think about it. But
I've seen token databases with 3+ million tokens.
I've got bayes code running now using hashes, using Sidney's
substr(sha1($token), -5) value. It provides a slight speedup (maybe
10-20%) on scanning. With the corpus I'm using I
Anyone else not getting commit mails?
Michael
On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 03:01:05PM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 01:14:38PM -0400, Duncan Findlay wrote:
>
> > Would it be useful to schedule a bug squashing party at some point?
> > The next week or so is bad for me, but others might be able to get
> > stuff done.
>
>
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 06:49:12PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> +The auto-whitelist is enabled using the -a flag to spamassassin or spamd.
> +(See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/AutoWhitelist for details on how
> +it works, if you're curious.)
Hmmmthis isn't true any longer, auto-whi
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 10:05:21AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
> We've been doing some preliminary tests with large databases and high
> volumes of mail. Our first target for optimization is moving the
> spam/ham counts into a separate table. The bayes_toks table is getting
> locked for
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 07:25:59PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> So -- devs/PMC people -- anyone object to doing this? Anyone
> agree it'd be a good thing to do?
>
> Sander -- is it acceptable by Apache policy to do this?
>
I'm +1 if it's not against an ASF policy.
Michael
On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 07:09:49PM -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I'm getting an error on the 3.0 spam assassin. Argument "BODY" isn't
> numeric in addition at /usr/lib/perl5/5.8.3/Mail/Spamassassin/Conf.pm
> line 985.
>
> I get the error when spam assassin (spamd) starts - and - when I run
> sa-l
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 11:02:31AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael Parker wrote:
> >you certainly should run it more than once, I'd say at
> >least 3 times with the same data.
>
> I'm having the machine run through some tests while I'm at work/school.
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 10:08:48AM +1200, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> I have two questions, one for the group, and one probably more for
> Michael Parker.
>
> First, is there an open bug on Bugzilla that anyone would like to see
> this discussion moved to? If not I think I or who
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 01:32:12PM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Sidney Markowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Also in the bayes_token changed token from VARCHAR to BIGINT. I patched
> > SQL.pm to convert the token string into the low order 15 hex digits of
> > the SHA-1 hash of the string
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:52:50AM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> What the heck is with PerMsgStatus::BEGIN? The ExclSec is rather
> large. And, oh yeah, it's called 3487 times for 200 messages.
Also, does dprofpp -T show anything useful?
Michael
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 12:52:50AM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> What the heck is with PerMsgStatus::BEGIN? The ExclSec is rather
> large. And, oh yeah, it's called 3487 times for 200 messages.
I'm not seeing the same thing. Here is the top 10 from a similar run:
%Time ExclSec CumulS #Calls se
On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 07:06:05AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> I committed a change in revision 9570 but did not receive the commit
> notice. But this commit went through to the cvs-commit mailing list. Is
> something flaky in svn or do only commits that specify a bug number in
> the log ge
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:34:26AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: jm
> Date: Mon Mar 15 00:34:25 2004
> New Revision: 9490
>
> Modified:
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/MANIFEST
> Log:
> moved hashcash code into a plugin (bug 3170)
>
> Modified: incubator/spamassassin/trunk/MANIFEST
Getting lots of this from mass-check, also by running ./spamassassin
in a build tree (ie no install):
Failed to run T_HASHCASH_22 SpamAssassin test, skipping:
(Can't locate object method "check_hashcash_value" via package
"Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus" at
/home/parker/
On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 10:01:01PM -0800, Kelsey Cummings wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 07:02:08PM -0600, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Me as well, guess it was just temporary. Anyone know what happens to
> > mail sent to the bugzilla alias when it's down? Does it disappear?
On Sun, Mar 14, 2004 at 04:43:53PM +, Matthew Cline wrote:
> On Monday 15 March 2004 12:30 am, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Bugzilla appears to be having some issues.
> >
> > Michael
>
> Works for me.
>
Me as well, guess it was just temporary. Anyone know wh
Bugzilla appears to be having some issues.
Michael
Anyone else having a problem talking to the repository?
Started at least before 4am CST. My mass-check update is hung.
svn.apache.org is up and can login, but I'm not getting a response
from the web server.
Michael
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 09:52:14AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
> I thought of a very simple optimization, but I can't test yet as I am
> still recovering from having had my computer in the shop for repairs.
> Can you say if it makes sense and if it does try it?
>
> In Bayes.pm, the subrouti
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 03:30:35PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-11 15:30 ---
> 1% good
> 2% acceptable
> 5% absolute limit
> 10% unacceptable
>
> Note that the performance penalty may rise as more priorities are added, so
> that
+1
Michael
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 04:21:56AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
>
> This sounds like a "Don't worry your pretty little head about it, the
> experts know what they are doing" argument.
>
Don't let my passion for the SQL stuffs cause you to not question it's
efficiencies, I think it's a good th
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:05:05AM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael Parker wrote:
> >The index would have to be loaded into memory, not the entire table.
> >The index on bayes_token should be fairly efficient. Given enough
> >memory MySQL can hold a good bit o
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 08:21:08AM -0600, Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:16:46 +0600 Alexander Litvinov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On ___, 11 2004 19:05, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> > > Michael Parker wrote:
> > > > Kelsey
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 07:36:07PM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> Michael Parker wrote:
> >Is there a particular problem you are trying to solve?
>
> Yes, I'm trying to figure out why Kelsey sees the very high I/O
> requirements that he does that blocks him from scalin
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 05:37:36PM +1300, Sidney Markowitz wrote:
> I started looking over the details of what we do with Bayes and MySQL,
> and I have some questions.
>
> The tables defined in sql/bayes_mysql.sql all have a username field that
> is varchar(200).
>
> Why do we need a long usern
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 03:34:50PM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok, I'll ask. Anyone for removing backward compatibility for v0/v1 DBs?
>
> Is that really going to speed us up in the long run? I mean, we'
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 11:23:22AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
> >Ok, I'll ask. Anyone for removing backward compatibility for v0/v1 DBs?
>
> How's about a config setting for "support upgrading from v0/v1 dbs",
> defaulting to off?
That defeats the purpose of removing support, getting rid of the
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 01:26:05PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 02:22:51AM -0800, Dan Quinlan wrote:
> > 1. It seems like we spend a fair bit time figuring out whether tokens
> >are magic tokens:
> >
> > %Time ExclSec CumulS #Calls sec/call Csec/c Name
> > 1.80 0
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 02:59:50AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: jm
> Date: Mon Mar 8 18:59:49 2004
> New Revision: 7058
>
> Modified:
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Constants.pm
>incubator/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm
>incubator/spa
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 12:11:39PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 10:48:50AM -0600, Michael Parker wrote:
> > Deep recursion on subroutine
> > "Mail::SpamAssassin::Message::Node::content_summary" at
> > /home/parker/SA/spamassassin-corpora/
I started getting this during yesterday morning's run:
Deep recursion on subroutine
"Mail::SpamAssassin::Message::Node::content_summary" at
/home/parker/SA/spamassassin-corpora/masses/../lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Message/Node.pm
line 423.
Out of memory!
I'm guessing some message is causing badness in
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:32:33AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> BTW, a tip on referring to bugs -- the convention is
>
> bug : blah blah
>
> simply because Bugzilla has the smarts to automatically turn "bug "
> into a hyperlink -- and it's easily greppable.
>
Ack, PR is wor
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 06:57:37PM -0800, Kelsey Cummings wrote:
>
> As our testing has shown, SA Bayes' engine has brutal I/O requirements
> using DB_File. Perhaps SQL could be far more efficient? Does anyone
> running SQL Bayes have a comparison of I/O profiles between SQL and
> DB_File?
>
I
I'm not totally certain about this part of this commit. See the
service_unavailable_error function. It mimics the bad protocol
method.
Can someone make sure I'm doing the right thing?
Michael
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 05:16:19AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Modified: incubator/spamassas
On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 10:22:17AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> FWIW, I took out that code -- we never got a CLA for it. So it may
> now be irrelevant ;)
Yeah, just trying to add back the functionality via custom query,
which I think I've covered, but wanted to be sure. I guess if someone
rea
Howdy,
I'm attempting to find any of the original mail thread/bug report for
the Horde ConfSourceSQL stuffs from Michael 'Moose' Dinn. I'm trying
to make sure that the custom query stuff I'm adding will work well.
Primarily what I'm wondering if it's just a matter of supporting
different column/
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
