At 13:36 -0600 03/19/2005, Michael Parker wrote: >On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 11:24:43AM -0800, Vicki Brown wrote: >> >> Why can't spamd re-read the system rules file if it's been changed? That's >> not difficult to test for (quickly). I'll take an option to do this >>PLEASE. > >You might enjoy that, but the performance hit it would cause would not >be liked by everyone else.
a) I don't think there'd be that much of a performance hit if it first checked to see if the file had changed and only read the rule set iff the file had changed b) that's precisely why I said "I'll take an option to do this" because that way _no one else would be affected_ unless they were someone like me who thought reading the changes was more important than half a microsecond. -- Vicki Brown ZZZ Journeyman Sourceror: zz |\ _,,,---,,_ Code, Docs, Process, Scripts & Philtres zz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ Perl, WWW, Mac OS X http://cfcl.com/vlb |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' SF Bay Area, CA USA _______________________ '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ___________________________
