Re: partial (lazy) scoring? (shortcircuit features)

2009-09-24 Thread ArtemGr
Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar at fantomas.sk writes: You haven't read Matt's explanation of why it wasn't a good idea, did you? There are rules with negative scores, which can puch the score back to the ham, e.g. whitelist. Would you like to stop scoring before e.g. whitelist is checked? I

Re: partial (lazy) scoring? - run a second time?

2009-09-24 Thread ArtemGr
Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar at fantomas.sk writes: That rises the question, whether the basic detections can be turned off. I found the following options: skip_rbl_checks 1 dns_available no use_bayes 0 use_bayes_rules 0 bayes_auto_learn 0 - but I do not see an option to turn

Re: partial (lazy) scoring? (shortcircuit features)

2009-09-24 Thread Matt Kettler
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: Matt Kettler mkettler_sa at verizon.net writes: In theory, a feature could be added to let you do something like this (SA doesn't have this feature, but I'm proposing it could be added): On 22.09.09 11:46, ArtemGr wrote: That would be a nice

Re: MagicSpam

2009-09-24 Thread RW
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 06:46:42 +0100 rich...@buzzhost.co.uk rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 23:36 +0100, RW wrote: On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:40:11 -0700 (PDT) linuxmagic sa...@linuxmagic.com wrote: Incidently the point about backscatter is wrong. The traditional

Re: MagicSpam

2009-09-24 Thread rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
On Thu, 2009-09-24 at 12:51 +0100, RW wrote: On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 06:46:42 +0100 rich...@buzzhost.co.uk rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 23:36 +0100, RW wrote: On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:40:11 -0700 (PDT) linuxmagic sa...@linuxmagic.com wrote: Incidently the

Re: Do I need to do anything to maintain MySQL?

2009-09-24 Thread Jari Fredriksson
I ran this command: ALTER TABLE bayes_seen ADD lastupdate timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP; It chugged for ~1.5N rows and the result is that all of the lastupdate fields have a value of 0's. All new lastupdate columns get set to the current time

Re: Report in header of SPAM emails

2009-09-24 Thread Jari Fredriksson
dears Srs, I have added the option report_safe 1, but the mail deposited in the quarantine folder not have any attached and SA report Do not use the amavis, if not the simscan Did you restart Spamd after the change?

Re: Do I need to do anything to maintain MySQL?

2009-09-24 Thread Benny Pedersen
On tor 24 sep 2009 04:57:57 CEST, Steven W. Orr wrote Since I haven't *ever* touched this table for cleanup, the above described cron job will not delete any rows for that period of time. you will have less problems with innodb then myisam here is my complete spamassassin sql setup, not

Re: partial (lazy) scoring? - run a second time?

2009-09-24 Thread Benny Pedersen
On tor 24 sep 2009 10:59:35 CEST, ArtemGr wrote Do you have measurements, or are you just imagining things? OCR-ing all the graphic attachments might be much slower than your usual spamassasin run. DCC and Pyzor checks might introduce large delays as well. fuzzyocr stop scanning if spam score

Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Steven W. Orr
I got the timestanp field added to the bayee_seen table. I don't know why but ALTER TABLE bayes_seen ADD lastupdate timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ON UPDATE CURRENT_TIMESTAMP; did not work as it set all of the lastupdate fields to '-00-00 00:00:00' which apparently is

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Benny Pedersen
On tor 24 sep 2009 20:00:49 CEST, Steven W. Orr wrote I. I am running MySQL version 5.067 which apparently is not enough to be allowed to run InnoDB. see if you have skipinnodb in my.cnf The questions is this: I thought that InnoDB was going to consume *more* resources because the purpose of

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Kris Deugau
Steven W. Orr wrote: I. I am running MySQL version 5.067 which apparently is not enough to be allowed to run InnoDB. Strange; IIRC InnoDB has been available since some late 3.something versions, and most 4.x releases. The MySQL docs should be the authoritative reference for this though.

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Jorn Argelo
Kris Deugau wrote: Steven W. Orr wrote: I. I am running MySQL version 5.067 which apparently is not enough to be allowed to run InnoDB. Strange; IIRC InnoDB has been available since some late 3.something versions, and most 4.x releases. The MySQL docs should be the authoritative reference

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Jari Fredriksson
24.9.2009 21:55, Kris Deugau wrote: Steven W. Orr wrote: The questions is this: I thought that InnoDB was going to consume *more* resources because the purpose of it was to support transactions. Am I wrong? If I convert to a higher rev of MySQL and get InnoDB will I get *better*

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread LuKreme
On 24-Sep-2009, at 13:46, Jorn Argelo wrote: Using InnoDB is absolutely vital and you cannot use MyISAM at all from my experience. My bayes_token table is 12 million rows and increasing every day, and performance is still just fine. Is there a write-up/how-to anyone's put together about

Free MX backup service that hels build my blacklist

2009-09-24 Thread Marc Perkel
I'm giving away a free MX backup service so that if your server goes down our servers will store and forward your email. You will also get some spam reduction especially from virus bots. Setup is automatic and all you have to do is change your MX records. Here's the instructions:

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Jari Fredriksson
24.9.2009 23:57, LuKreme kirjoitti: On 24-Sep-2009, at 13:46, Jorn Argelo wrote: Using InnoDB is absolutely vital and you cannot use MyISAM at all from my experience. My bayes_token table is 12 million rows and increasing every day, and performance is still just fine. Is there a

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Kris Deugau
Jorn Argelo wrote: I can tell from experience that MyISAM is useless when it comes to Bayes. As pointed out by Benny Pedersen, MySQL will do nothing more than waiting on table locks. A single UPDATE query will take 30-90 seconds, and even more when you are on a busy site, not to mention the

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Kris Deugau
LuKreme wrote: Is there a write-up/how-to anyone's put together about setting up bayes with MySQL? Aside from the sparse docs that ship with SA, none I've seen. I'm still fiddling the sitewide database size (number of tokens) a year and a half after the general configuration reached its

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread Kris Deugau
Jari Fredriksson wrote: MyISAM locks whole table when it needs a lock, InnoDB has row locking, thus operations on tables like awl and bayes_token will be much better if there are multiple spamd connected to the database. I stand corrected. I've fought with MySQL in one way or another nearly

Re: Two more SA/MySQL questions.

2009-09-24 Thread LuKreme
On 24-Sep-2009, at 15:39, Kris Deugau wrote: LuKreme wrote: Does using MySQL bayes allow you to fake per-user bayes with MySQL- based users? Mmm, after rereading this a few times I'm not sure what you're asking. By default it's per-user; each calling user passed by spamc or

Re: Understanding SpamAssassin

2009-09-24 Thread poifgh
Bowie Bailey wrote: For auto-learning, the high and low scoring messages are fed to Bayes. However, for an optimal setup, you should manually train Bayes on as much of your (verified) ham and spam as possible. The more of your mail stream Bayes sees, the better the results will be.