> > If performance is an issue, how about an option like... > > > > HIT_AND_RUN 1 > > > > ...that would cause spamd to stop processing once your threshhold had > > been met? IOW why keep scanning text once the message has been > > identified as spam? I'm sure that I'm missing something here but I'd > > like to know the reasons. > > There are rules with negative scores, whitelists, etc. You need the > _final_ score in order to determine whether or not the message is likely > to be spam.
I know there was once an option like this... it was removed for the reason Couldn't the tests be reordered to run the possible negatives first. This would let this guy and others like him save cpu time. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
