Marc Cousin wrote:

> Is this setup working well ?

Not yet. I have removed all users execpt myself; they were complaining :)


> The problem I see with it is that user1,user2,user3 ... won't have their own 
> database., they'll all use default_user's one.
> 
> Am I mistaken ? If I'm right, it means we'll 'sacrifice' them because they 
> won't have their own token database anymore.

Correct. I found no other way unfortunately, and response to my question
was also sparse.


I have the impression that every time I do something 'big' in my dspam
config, dspam gets really confused and misses a lot of spam. Then again,
it might be that I have all users' training mode set to 'toe', and do
some purging every night, so it might as well be that dspam only has a
record for spam, and no ham, and handles mail with more 'care' because
it has no ham-reference material. I'm speculating about dspam internals
here :)

Wat I have now is

<...>
default_user:merged:*,-user1
default_user:shared:user1
<...>

and training mode for all users set to 'toe', except for default_user
and user1, which are set to 'tum'. I now expect dspam to keep the
default_user dictionary somewhat up-to-date even with purging old data.

It's a bit of a pain in the *ss that every time I try something it takes
a couple of days to see if it turned out well. And an even bigger pain
if it turns out to not work so well :)



Robin

Reply via email to