Jan-Pieter,
Can you open a bug against 3.0.0 on bugzilla.spamassassin.org and attach
the patches (use the "Create a new attachment" link after the bug has
been opened)?
My main concern is the increase in CPU time required (since multiple
spamd processes will be running), especially on boxes that don't have
local DNSBL mirrors.
My secondary concern is that you'll never almost get responses from
other blacklists and this might result in a lower hit rate (since a
negative response is still a response). That should probably be
addressed via early exit on high score, though.
> This now uses IO::Select
For performance reasons, should we do this without IO::Select and just
use select()?
> I suggest adding a test for $Config{'osname'} eq 'MSWin32', and just
> calling "sleep" in that case.
Can you add that? Set a variable at the top of the function using
Mail::SpamAssassin::Util::am_running_on_windows().
> That it helps performance dramatically can be seen from some stats.
> On a regular mailflow (practically everything spam), average runtime
> of spamassassin before the patch was 0.92 seconds. After the patch,
> average runtime dropped to 0.26 seconds, a 3.5 times speedup.
Can you look at average CPU user+system time?
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan ApacheCon! 13-17 November (3 SpamAssassin
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ http://www.apachecon.com/ sessions & more)
