Re: spamprobe-1.1x7 released

Jacob S <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.spam.spamprobe.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:12:53 -0500
Brian Burton <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jacob S wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 17:36:59 -0500
> > Brian Burton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>* Changed the default hash file size to 32 megs to give people more 
> >>growing room.
> > 
> > Do we still need to double the the db size when used on 64bit
> > processors? I'm about to do some testing on a Sparc64 running Debian
> > Linux.
> 
> The record size in a hash database should be the same on 64 bit 
> processors as it is on 32 bit processors.  I haven't tested that
> though  since I don't have a 64 bit system to test on.
> 
> A great test to run would be to build a hash database on a 32 bit 
> system, export that to a file, import that file into a database on a
> 64  bit system, export on that 64 bit system to a new file and then
> diff the  two export files.  They should be identical.

hmm... I was thinking previously (with PBL) the size difference was only
noticed when doing a du/ls -l on the db. When exported to a text file,
both dbs were the same size. Is there something different about hashing
that I don't know about, or is this a case where I don't know anything
and should keep quiet? :-) 

Thanks,
Jacob


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.