Re: bayes db site wide or per user
Theo Van Dinter schrieb: On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 09:44:04PM +0100, Alex Handle wrote: postfix/mysql/nfs/amavisd-new/spamassassin and now we Is it a bad idea to use a site wide bayes database or is it better to use a per user database in this scenario? Per user DBs will give you better results, but since you're running from the MTA, your only choice is site-wide. I could disable the spamchecks in amavisd-new and invoke sa through maildrop. But i don't know if a per-user database would scale for 100,000 mailboxes?
bayes db site wide or per user
Hi to all, a month a go we implemented a mailcluster based on postfix/mysql/nfs/amavisd-new/spamassassin and now we would like to add bayesian filtering to the system. Our Cluster is designed to scale for about 100 000 mailboxes. The users should forward spam and ham to sa-learn by sending the mails as attachment to a specific address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is it a bad idea to use a site wide bayes database or is it better to use a per user database in this scenario? How resistent is a site wide setup with a lot of mailboxes against poisoning? Thanks! Alex
Re: bayes db site wide or per user
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 09:44:04PM +0100, Alex Handle wrote: postfix/mysql/nfs/amavisd-new/spamassassin and now we Is it a bad idea to use a site wide bayes database or is it better to use a per user database in this scenario? Per user DBs will give you better results, but since you're running from the MTA, your only choice is site-wide. -- Randomly Selected Tagline: Wheee! ...ow, I bit my tongue! --Ralph Wiggum Bart's Inner Child (Episode 1F05) pgpHXRSHFKtRT.pgp Description: PGP signature
