On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 07:48:02PM +0200, Johannes russek wrote:
> 
> ah, okay. the windows guys. a pure perl interface would of course be very
> platform
> independent, but i wonder if the performance impact would be big or not, as
> performance might be an important issue for the ones using spamc/spamd.
> i have got a pure perl implementation of the spamc part, but it does only
> support
> UNIX domain sockets, not tcp.
> that might not be very hard to implement, but we could try to bench my xs
> interface
> against that pure perl thingie on a socketfile, when i'm finished.
> 

/me drools.  Can you send it to the list?

> anyway, another question to the list about this issue:
> is it planned to have libspamc include more details about the tests spamd
> made?
> right now there is only the report and the score/threshold, nothing else.
> so if one wants to have the number of hits, the names of the tests and so
> on,
> he (well, in this case, me :)) has to regexp it out of the report.
> that could have another performance impact, so why don't make the spamd
> protocoll
> more machine processable and add HTTP like some lines like
> TestsHit: RAZOR2_CHECK DCC_CHECK DNS_FROM_RFC1_DNS
> and so on.
> could that be done?

Been awhile, but maybe spamc -y is what you want? If not it's possible
the return headers could be augmented a bit, maybe an RFE in bugzilla
with exactly what you're looking for, and of course patches welcome :)

Michael

Reply via email to