Quoting Marc Perkel <marc@???>:
>
>
> Steve Lamb wrote:
>
>> Peter Bowyer wrote:
>>
>>> 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?
>>>
>>
>> This is incorrect. SpamAssassin is a framework within which different
>> tests to identify spam from ham are applied. Bayesian classification just
>> happens to be one test SpamAssassin performs but it is by no means the only
>> test or, in fact, a required test.
>>
>>
>
> Right - lets suppose I'm getting email from truthout.com and I have
> 50 users who subscribe to that - and it's all ham. Do I want to run
> 50 copies of the same email through SA and have it learn that 50
> times? And have the system slow down processing it? Not if I can help
> it.
>
> What I want to do is after a few that Exim learns somehow that this
> is all ham and just bless it without having to rerun SA every time.
> Exim is at least 1000 times faster than SA and bypassing SA reduces
> system load.
>
Call SA twice. The first call is configured to only run the
auto-whitelist rule
in test mode and not store/learn the results. If the result is a negagtive
score, the sender is in the whitelist and therefore do not call the main SA
function. Note: this will not catch any machines turned into spambots or virus
scanning.
Tim
