On Fri, 15 Jun 2018 16:24:46 +0300
Reio Remma wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
> learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
There are two types of DCC test, most people only use the free version
which is purely a bulk mail test.
On 15.06.18 16:24, Reio Remma wrote:
I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
sa-learn only trains bayes.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail
Hello!
I'm curious, if I turn on DCC learning, does it learn with both the
learn and report options to sa-learn or only report?
Thanks!
Reio
On Sun, 2009-02-15 at 02:05 +0100, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> Lindsay, if you end up doing some benchmarking, please let us know. I
> wouldn't be surprised if you're actually the first one to do this across
> the Internet. :)
>
Just a thought. Since getting message sizes and counts on traffic
be
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 17:07 -0600, Michael Parker wrote:
> On Feb 14, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > Well that's something to consider. I had hoped when I subscribed to
> > this list to ask this question that I'd find people, possibly SA
> > developers on it, who had benchmarked the
On Feb 14, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 15:04 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than
the
spamc/spamd traffic.
I like that you are asking the question. But I hate to guess at
which
is better though. The
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 15:04 -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than
> the
> > spamc/spamd traffic.
>
> I like that you are asking the question. But I hate to guess at which
> is better though. The weakest benchmark data point is better than
Kris Deugau wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
>> The question is which is better, sending the message body (spamc <->
>> spamd traffic) or database queries (spamd <-> mysql traffic) over the
>> expensive link?
>
> I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than the
> spamc/spamd tra
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 18:11 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries being more efficient than the
> spamc/spamd traffic.
I think we have a consensus here :-) I didn't get any definitive
answers here but the folks who responded made me think about the problem
a little mo
John Hardin wrote:
If I may try:
The question is which is better, sending the message body (spamc <->
spamd traffic) or database queries (spamd <-> mysql traffic) over the
expensive link?
Yeah, after going back and forth I think I've finally got that.
I would bet on Bayes/userpref queries
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 16:51 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> Scenario 2: spamc on box A communicates with a _local_ spamd, which
> accesses local config files but uses a MySQL connection _over the
> network_ to box A to access the Bayes/userpref database.
Sorry, this should read:
Scenario 2: spa
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:26 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> *nod* I don't know what kind of data size the Bayes SQL queries run,
> but it probably averages out somewhere close to a order of magnitude
> less than the full email.
>
> I think I misread your original email, and I'm still not sure I
>
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 14:27 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> If I may try:
>
> The question is which is better, sending the message body (spamc <-> spamd
> traffic) or database queries (spamd <-> mysql traffic) over the expensive
> link?
Implicit point well make :-) I think I agree with you.
--
L
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Kris Deugau wrote:
Although I appreciate your advice, my question here is not _whether_ I
should do the integration, but which of the two methods of integrating
the databases will be most efficient of bandwidth and other resources.
I'm getting confused again. What
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:24 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
Although I appreciate your advice, my question here is not _whether_ I
should do the integration, but which of the two methods of integrating
the databases will be most efficient of bandwidth and other resources.
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
I think you misunderstand me. If spamc on machine A is invoked with -d
then spamc will use whatever databases and
configurations are in effect for spamd on machine B. This is what the
-d option is for. The "actual processing" is done by spamd, whichever
instance (machin
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:24 -0600, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> Although I appreciate your advice, my question here is not _whether_ I
> should do the integration, but which of the two methods of integrating
> the databases will be most efficient of bandwidth and other resources.
After thinking about
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:21 -0500, Kris Deugau wrote:
> Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > I have two servers. Currently they're both running instances of spamd
> > with separate mysql databases, however I'd like run both instances from
> > the same database on one of the servers. There are two ways to do
Lindsay Haisley wrote:
I have two servers. Currently they're both running instances of spamd
with separate mysql databases, however I'd like run both instances from
the same database on one of the servers. There are two ways to do this:
1. I can give the -d option to spamc where it's invoked i
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> I have two servers. Currently they're both running instances of spamd
> with separate mysql databases, however I'd like run both instances from
> the same database on one of the servers. There are two ways to do this:
>
> 1. I can give the -d optio
I have two servers. Currently they're both running instances of spamd
with separate mysql databases, however I'd like run both instances from
the same database on one of the servers. There are two ways to do this:
1. I can give the -d option to spamc where it's invoked in the mail
system, with t
Irina said:
Hi Irina,
> Thank you all for answering me.
>
> I found one link that may be very interesting
> (http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets)
>
> Next, I thought if there is a place for automatic uploading rules, then may
> be notifying me and I would reload SA. That is what I
Hallo und guten Morgen jdow,
Heute (am 08.06.2005 - 03:42 Uhr)
schriebst Du:
> I think it comes from Yiddish.
maybe ;) ... long time ago
kiebitzen = in German = ueber die Schulter schauen - jemand was
abgucken
--
Viele Grüße, Kind regards,
Jim Knuth
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ #277289867
P
From: "Irina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hello Joanne,
> I am not really sure what you meant by
> kibitz the SARE process
>
> Sorry, English is not my native language and some words don't go together.
Kibitz is what onlookers do behind the chess player's backs second
guessing their efforts. I thi
Irina wrote:
We don't use SURBL network tests because we use RBL lists from mail server
itself.
SURBL works differently. Most RBLs are designed to check the sending
server (usually by IP address). SURBLs look at links embedded in the
messages themselves.
For example, if I include a link t
Irina wrote:
I also have NOT used Bayes. Don't know how safe it is. Would I just submit
a spam message and I don't have to anything else, or ham the same way? Not
sure.
Some people have problems with Bayes, but many find that it does help a
lot. It does require you to train it with both sp
nt: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: A question
> From: "Rick Macdougall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Irina wrote:
> >
> > >Thank you all for answering me.
> > >
> > >I found one link that may be very interesting
> > >(http:
c:
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: A question
> Irina wrote:
>
> >Thank you all for answering me.
> >
> >I found one link that may be very interesting
> >(http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets)
> >
> >
> >
> >I
jdow wrote:
From: "Rick Macdougall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Irina wrote:
Thank you all for answering me.
I found one link that may be very interesting
(http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets)
I first should mention, I am a new SUBSCRIBER, not a new user to SA. I
h
From: "Rick Macdougall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Irina wrote:
>
> >Thank you all for answering me.
> >
> >I found one link that may be very interesting
> >(http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets)
> >
> >
> >
> >I first should mention, I am a new SUBSCRIBER, not a new user to SA. I
have
>
Irina wrote:
Thank you all for answering me.
I found one link that may be very interesting
(http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/CustomRulesets)
I first should mention, I am a new SUBSCRIBER, not a new user to SA. I have
been using it for a couple of years. Over that period I have created
t
Irina Kalachnikova
Systems Programmer
NetAccess Systems Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Irina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 5:40 PM
Subject:
Irina wrote:
> Hello at SA list.
>
> I am a new subscriber - don't get angry if I did something wrong :-)
>
>
> 1. Is there any place and/or are there any tools that are available
> for updating SA rules automatically (on FreeBSD)?
http://www.exit0.us/index.php?pagename=RulesDuJour
Note:
Hello at SA list.
I am a new subscriber - don't get angry if I did
something wrong :-)
1. Is there any place and/or are there
any tools that are available for updating SA rules automatically (on
FreeBSD)?
2. What can I use to check on SA
configuration from a Perl program (spamass
>>Is there a possibility that in default Exim setups, or default
>>OS-specific Exim packages, the exiscan config lines are being inserted
>>*without* the required message size limits, thereby allowing massive
>>emails to be scanned by SpamAssassin? that would inflate scanner
>>sizes nonlinearl
Craig Jackson wrote:
Is there a possibility that in default Exim setups, or default
OS-specific Exim packages, the exiscan config lines are being
inserted *without* the required message size limits, thereby
allowing massive emails to be scanned by SpamAssassin? that
would inflate scanner sizes n
Justin Mason wrote:
It appears that Exiscan has now become part of Exim by default,
and it also appears that (at least in the default exiscan patch)
it doesn't modify the config files directly to add itself to
the MTA's flow.
This is correct. The shipped configuration file doesn't include any
Justin Mason wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Recently we've been seeing a *lot* of Exim users asking questions
(here and on IRC) about spamd chewing up massive quantities of
RAM.
It appears that Exiscan has now become part of Exim by default,
and it also appears that (at l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Recently we've been seeing a *lot* of Exim users asking questions
(here and on IRC) about spamd chewing up massive quantities of
RAM.
It appears that Exiscan has now become part of Exim by default,
and it also appears that (at least in the default ex
39 matches
Mail list logo
