http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5148





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-12-08 09:41 -------
The patch will not enforce whether Pyzor looks up the server in series or 
parallel.

Pyzor itself is where that is done.  And as of the version I have (using FreeBSD
pkg rev pyzor-0.4.0_4), it is doing the lookups in series.

It's up to the user to put more than one server in his .pyzor/servers file.  If
he does so and multiple servers are regularly not very responsive, he should
reconsider the pyzor server config.

This patch just keeps SA from not working at all if there are more than one
response from 'pyzor check'.  Before this patch, you could get two or more good
responses in less than a second, but the SA plugin would not understand the
response(s), throw up its hand and use _none_ of the legit responses.

IMO, since most people are probably using the official 'pyzor discover'
published server (66.250.40.33) it will typically be just as slow whether you
add another server or not.  Especially with the default timeout settings (5 per
server for pyzor, and 5 total for SA).

I have these two servers in my config:

82.94.255.100:24441
66.250.40.33:24441

The former is almost always responsive (that could change of course).

If both respond when doing 'pyzor check', they do so typically in
a total of half a second or less.  If any one is not responding, you will hit
timeouts.  As I said, I think it's better to set the per-server timeout lower in
pyzor and the overall SA timeout just a bit larger.

This will all probably be much better if and when server syncing is added and
the world gets a few more servers.

We could add to the docs that I updated something like:

"As of this writing, Pyzor communicates with servers in series, not in 
parallel."

If I find a round tuit, I'll send it along.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to