At 4:37 PM -0400 06/14/2013, Alex wrote:
Yeah, but not bayes20. That's bad for sure. You should start
collecting now, or pull a few hundred from your recent quarantine and
use those, along with people's mail folders.
Well, I got bayes99 when I ran spamassassin manually just now. So, I
really have no idea. I never trained the DB with this particular
email (the last training I did was the day before receiving this
email), and clearly spamd got a much lower Bayes score, but
spamassassin manually got a higher one.
I officially have no clue what the heck is going on.
I should reiterate that this SA is running in a system with Parallels
Pro Control Panel (virtual site hosting). spamd is configured to run
as setuid user; each user has his/her own Bayes DB (as it should be,
I think). spamd should be loading my DB when it runs, the same way
spamassassin is doing. I have zero idea why I'm getting different
results from spamd and spamassassin, nor do I have any idea how to
check if it's properly loading my DB, etc. I _do_ find that the
bayes files in my (user) .spamassassin directory are being updated
regularly, so I'm fairly confident spamd is using my personal DB, the
same way that spamassassin manually should be...
I think the only difference would be if spamd somehow didn't recognize
all the locations for your rules. Perhaps create a rule that you know
will hit with a very low score in each directory that contains rules.
Maybe there's a way to run spamd in the foreground with debugging,
like there is with amavisd.
I don't think there's any problem with the rule locations, but I have
no idea. Shouldn't spamd run with exactly the same setup as
spamassassin?
The only thing I can _possibly_ think of is that sa-update is run
nightly, but spamd doesn't get rebooted nightly... if some of the
rules have changed since the last time spamd was started (in my case,
in January -- I have a very stable server!), then maybe spamd won't
pick them up, but running spamassassin manually certainly will.
Does this sound like a legit potential reason for the discrepancy?
(Although, would the bayes rules have changed at all, or would that
be based ONLY on my DB? If the latter, I'm still stumped as to how
spamd got bayes20 and spamassassin got bayes99 on the same email.)
I've restarted spamd right now and I guess we'll see how the next FN
I get compares between spamd and spamassassin.
Thanks.
--- Amir
