Re: Migrating from SpamAssassin to Bogofilter

On Thu, 2013-06-06 at 14:34 +0100, RW wrote:
> I don't want anyone to get the wrong impression about that. When you
> say "upstream hasn't been much help", you demonstrated one certain bug
> in the Evolution plugin and evidence of further plugin problems. In
> every test performed outside the plugin, spamc/spamd behaved correctly.
> SA developers can't be expected to debug Evolution.

Hey RW. I don't want to argue with you over that, but having personally
examined the relevant source for both Evolution and spamc, along with
having liaised with developers on both projects, we agree to disagree on
that.

> The default configuration has network tests enabled by default (and I
> don't recommend turning them off); in this case performance is typically
> dominated by waiting for the slower remote servers. Bayes and other
> local tests are performed whilst waiting for responses. In the past
> I've seen SA with pre-cached network tests and with Bayes enabled,
> average 30+ emails per second on a low-end desktop from a few years
> back, so I wouldn't say Bayes is all that slow.

Like I said, I don't know what mode it was using, only that it was
indeed quite slow.

-- 
Kip Warner -- Software Engineer
OpenPGP encrypted/signed mail preferred
http://www.thevertigo.com

_______________________________________________
Bogofilter mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAlGyJGgACgkQLXnfK7bii23kXQCgr+JUS0B8p11v0QUApNw1qyh1
xnIAniyPwdrGsfiPSe/0j8+ZJqpSi1WT
=i212
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----