Re: [exim] Reducing Spam Assassin Load

Peter Bowyer wrote:

>On 01/10/05, Marc Perkel <marc@???> wrote:
>
>
>>One of the things that is creating SA load is processing good email. I'm
>>trying to figure out a way to bless stuff that I know is ham so I can
>>bypass spam assassin. And it has to somehow just learn it automatically.
>>
>>
>
>But that's what SA does - learns what's spam and what's ham by
>Bayesian analysis. I'd have thought any attempt to do this up front
>would end up duplicating what SA does?
>
>You could experiment with a reputation system which applies positive
>scores whan an IP sends you ham and negative scores when it sends spam
>or fails an up-front test (DNSBL, HELO checks and so on). And set a
>threshold for whitelisting around the SA check. But that would prevent
>SA learning from known ham - which is an important part of the
>Bayesian process.
>
>
>
I know SA does that but SA is very processor and resource hungry. One of
the tricks I use to process the volume of email that I do is to avoid
using SA whenever I can. I have eliminated about 85% of spam before it
goes to SA and that has increased my capacity to process mail greatly.
Now the problem is that all ham has to be processed through SA. Often
I'm getting a lot of ham from the same users or mailing lists which is
the same good message over and over. And it all passes - but it slows
things down.