http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-01-12 15:45 ------- Subject: Re: DBs (AWL, Bayes) ought to be able to be put into an SQL Database On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 03:46:07PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-01-12 14:51 ------- > Created an attachment (id=1685) --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=1685&action=view) > --> (http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/attachment.cgi?id=1685&action=view) > AWL/Bayes SQL Patch At this point I am very happy with the patch. I've been running some variation of the AWL portion for nearly a year on my production server and it has performed well. I've performed extensive tests on the Bayes portion of the code and am confident, and will be eating dog food later this evening or tomorrow. Several folks expressed interest recently in the patch and I supplied it, but have only received minimal feedback. I'd love to get more eyeballs on the patch and hear from folks who are using it in production. Speed wise, I'm very satisfied. I actually found it to be faster in some of my recent tests, by a small fraction on an untuned server. I imagine someone with good hardware and a well tuned DB server would be very happy with the performance. I'm currently at the point where to do much more in this area it would take a bit more radical design changes (ie forking of a DB handler in spamd to cache DB handles and other similar things). Michael ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
