From: Daniel Quinlan Sent: Monday, 5 July 2004 8:09 a.m. To: Scott Truman >Yes, but our loading is little different than any MTA-based DNS blacklist implementation. In contrast to >some, we also never send a second DNS query.
>Sure ... only if (a) network tests were not I/O-bound, (b) if network test I/O cannot be done in the >background while CPU-bound work was being done, or (c) both. Since (b) is true and because the best way to improve >performance is to send out all requests before doing the local tests and collect the results after the local tests are >done, the optimization you're proposing isn't an option. I see what you are saying, but you are assuming that everybody needs that blazing performance. All the sites I have spamassassin on would not be hindered at all by running net checks after the local tests. I'm not saying make it the default option, but an option none the less. As it stands it sounds like it is too hard to implement, but if that particular code was to be revisited for some other reason, then perhaps it is something you might want to keep in mind. If it's a case of one size fits all then obviously the concept has no use; it's either net tests on, or net tests off with nothing in between. > The other way to put it is that by the time you know that local tests could have done the job, it's too late. As above - if the net tests _could_ be run sequentially after the local tests, and the accumulated score was such that net tests didn't need to be run, then they wouldn't be run. Cheers Scott
