-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Daniel Quinlan writes: > "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Is there a way that [user rules] could be saved in a more-compiled > > state when used with spamd and similar? Maybe name the rules with the > > username as part of the procedure name, and just add them to the > > namespace the first time encountered? > > Beyond the memory bloating this could potentially cause and the > potentially more complicated security aspects, it's important to > optimize for the common case. I've been thinking we might be able to > move all user rules into their own priority and then *only* those would > be slower and overall performance would be as good as reasonably > possible. Also, when there are no user rules, the user rule priority > could just be skipped for good performance. > > In the long run, it might even be possible to give user rules priorities > based on the user name (non-numeric ones) so they could be cached. I don't get it -- how does that help? - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFC5BJAMJF5cimLx9ARAtu/AKCaOu6/yYj46MxHwXiwiEfU54JdPwCfQhSM 6fR7KmFEJfaCgvZ/B3NJTzw= =0/Gr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
