On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 14:27:57 -0500, "Michael Scheidell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: Nigel Frankcom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 2:24 PM >> To: SpamAssassin >> Subject: Re: Best Choice for Bayes filtering on SpamAssassin >> >> My MTA has a list of SA servers it will use in series; if 1 >> is unavailable it will got to 2 and so on. > >Biggest issue with that, is that box #2 will see less 'real email' then >box #1, and have a very jaded view of the world... Almost EVERYTHING >would be a spam token.. > >Its pretty easy to set up a dual master/slave mysql server and let them >talk to each other. > >If its just the bayes db, there should be no collisions, but if there >are, a cronjob forcing a skip/restart should work. Since, as we well know, spammers aim for the higher MX's, they *should* have the more jaded view. That said, I don't face this issue since all SA's use the same db. My failover servers have lower scoring than my primaries for just this reason. Just as my servers that act as failover for other domains have lower tolerances. Primaries & failovers share user files so there's none of this fake address rubbish to deal with. This was one of the 1st issues we tackled with the MTA to avoid loading up the SA servers unnecessarily. Nigel
