« Return to Thread: Suggestion to developers
Re: Suggestion to developers
by Matt Kettler-3
::
Rate this Message:
Crocomoth wrote:
> Matt Kettler-3 wrote:
>
>> SA 3.2.x already does this, you just need to know how. Read the docs on
>> the shortcircuit plugin, and the "priority" option for rules:
>>
>> Shortcircuit allows you to define when to "bail out"
>> http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_Shortcircuit.html
>>
>>
>
> Thank you for very useful information.
> This method and plug-in could really make checking faster.
> But, I have to say:
> 1. Using this method, admin must understand that the fate of every message
> (for all users) will depend from the single rule.Not if you set it up properly.. You can have multiple rules run with a
very early priority (low number), then have another one run with a
semi-early priority which does shortcircuiting. All of the "very early"
rules will be involved in the decision to shortcircuit or not.
> In some cases, this looks
> like not enough, especially when the system is used by multiple users with
> quite different desired average message content. So, bayes may generate
> false positives, in default configuration.
> 2. I suspect that not every admin could be smart enough or have enough time
> to develop his own rulesets with shortcircuit involved to get really good
> and reliable results. But, he could be able to turn some option in config
> file and restart SA.
>
Agreed.
> 3. Method proposed by me is not mutually exclusive with shortcircuit. They
> could work together.
>
Yes, but the method you proposed is only feasible using these tools
anyway. SA can't "auto-sort" the rules in any reasonble way without
severely degrading performance, or risking serious miscategorization
problems.
Trust me, the topic isn't new, and shortcircuit/priority is about the
best you can do. You have to make those manual decisions.
Now, it's possible for the devs to be the deciders, not the end-admins,
but someone has to manually prioritize.
> Matt Kettler-3 wrote:
>
>> SA 3.2.x already does this, you just need to know how. Read the docs on
>> the shortcircuit plugin, and the "priority" option for rules:
>>
>> Shortcircuit allows you to define when to "bail out"
>> http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Plugin_Shortcircuit.html
>>
>>
>
> Thank you for very useful information.
> This method and plug-in could really make checking faster.
> But, I have to say:
> 1. Using this method, admin must understand that the fate of every message
> (for all users) will depend from the single rule.
very early priority (low number), then have another one run with a
semi-early priority which does shortcircuiting. All of the "very early"
rules will be involved in the decision to shortcircuit or not.
> In some cases, this looks
> like not enough, especially when the system is used by multiple users with
> quite different desired average message content. So, bayes may generate
> false positives, in default configuration.
> 2. I suspect that not every admin could be smart enough or have enough time
> to develop his own rulesets with shortcircuit involved to get really good
> and reliable results. But, he could be able to turn some option in config
> file and restart SA.
>
Agreed.
> 3. Method proposed by me is not mutually exclusive with shortcircuit. They
> could work together.
>
Yes, but the method you proposed is only feasible using these tools
anyway. SA can't "auto-sort" the rules in any reasonble way without
severely degrading performance, or risking serious miscategorization
problems.
Trust me, the topic isn't new, and shortcircuit/priority is about the
best you can do. You have to make those manual decisions.
Now, it's possible for the devs to be the deciders, not the end-admins,
but someone has to manually prioritize.
« Return to Thread: Suggestion to developers
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
