On 03/15/2015 09:27 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.03.2015 um 21:12 schrieb Axb:
On 03/15/2015 09:00 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
that could be even a sloppy implementation just truncate after XX
bytes
and analyze the remaining piece to keep that part simple and fast - at
the end it would improve the result with as less as possible overhead
and code compared to skip a message
that wheel has been invented... and quite a few do it right. Your
choice
of glue is not one of them. And SA shouldn't follow the bad examples
no - problems in general should be solved at the root cause
the root cause is that SA is overwhelmed with large mails and so instead
work around that problem in every glue on that planet it just should
only scan the amount of a message it can handle
you may disagree because bounce that burden to the glue needs no effort
on your side, but that don't make it right
if you think SA is "overwhelmed" then it's definitely the wrong tool for
you.
maybe you should try rspamd (https://rspamd.com/)
come on, stop that attitude
what is the reason that you feel always attacked and suggest people
should creep away instead see constructive criticism as positive and
helpful over the long?
I'm trying to suggest options which may help you instead of expecting SA
to bend backwards just coz you think it should.
SA is the most inneficient link in the chain, so it wouldn't be very
smart to do what you suggest when it should be tackled before SA sees
any content.
otherwise the default for spamc of 500k and sa-learn of 256k won't exist
which are both raised here to much larger values after find out the
amount of skipped messages for scanning and ignored messages for training
SA is a framework - per default, with conservative settings, it works
very well for most ppl, those who prefer other values can and will
change them.
Many ppl even fork it and bend it to fit their needs.
RIP horse.. I'm outta here
