In order to implement something like this, you would need to know the order of rules processing (which perhaps there is one - but I don't know it). You would need to be careful if you have rules which will assign negative scores which typically do so after other rules have already given positive ones. Every SA implementation would be unique, so SA would have to be modified to rules some specific rule sets first before any others (maybe it does now?) and you would then want to make certain your custom scores go into those files. In my own implementation, I put my custom rules into a unique .cf file which I have created so I can distinguish it from other rule sets. The "out-of-the-box" SA wouldn't run this file first (unless SA can be modified to read a designated file before it reads others).
-----Original Message----- From: Crocomoth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 9:42 AM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Suggestion to developers SpamAssassin is a really great product. But, it is perl-based and checks every message with a lot of (all) rules (, always!). Volume of spam is constantly increasing, as well as CPU and memory load that SA creates on servers. As a SA user, I would be happy to have the following possibility in the next version: 1. Add an option which will allow to limit number of rules run against every message. I.e., if the limit of spam points is reached to required_score, stop further checking and process the message as a spam. I think, not all users really interested in gathering all statistics about all spam messages. 2. According to (1), it makes sense to sort all rules from lightweight to heavyweight (including ones which require internet queries) and make checking in this order. This could allow to lower SA footprint. Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Suggestion-to-developers-tf4429767.html#a12637043 Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
