[Mimedefang] Memory Limit Variables?

[Jan-Pieter Cornet]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 05:04:03PM -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> > The -VE rules should be run before the +VE rules, i would have thought tbh,
> 
> Not necessarily.  What if some of the negative rules are very expensive?
> The optimal order is a nightmare to figure out, but a first cut might go
> something like this:
> 
> 1) Split the rules into positive- and negative-weighted sets.
[...]
> 3) Kick off any "background" rules first.  These are things like DNS
> lookup that can proceed (sort-of) asynchronously while computation goes on.
> These background rules must all be positive-weighted or the algorithm
> below breaks.

... or add up all negative scores, and add the absolute value to your
threshhold (but then substract when the results come in...). More hairy!

> the asynchronous rules and add them to the score.  (You can stop if it
> exceeds the spam threshold).
[...]

Also note that none of this saves you any _memory_, which is where this
started. The memory is eaten by the compilation phase, which happens
right when mimedefang starts. More memory is eaten when the mail to be
processed is stuffed into various perl variables inside SA.

To make it save memory you'd either have to do lazy compilation, or
improve the way perl handles shared memory buffers internally.

> Nasty!

Quite.

-- 
Jan-Pieter Cornet <johnpc at xs4all.nl>
!! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended recipient. !!
!! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems. Please !!
!! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the logs.  !!