Spam Action rules: first match vs. all match? (2)

[Julian Field]

At 10:18 05/08/2003, you wrote:
>Julian,
>
> > The other thing I have just implemented helps solve the problem of not
> > being able to predict the result of a ruleset when there are lots of
> > it does mean you can predict exactly what will happen for any given
> > message, which has got to be a good thing :-)
> >
> > # When trying to work out the value of configuration parameters which are
> > # using a ruleset, this controls the behaviour when a rule is checking the
> > # "To:" addresses.
> > # If this option is set to "yes", then the following happens when checking
> > # the ruleset:
> > #   a) 1 recipient. Same behaviour as normal.
> > #   b) Several recipients, but all in the same domain (domain.com for
> example).
> > #      The rules are checked for one that matches the string
> "*@domain.com".
> > #   c) Several recipients, not all in the same domain.
> > #      The rules are checked for one that matches the string "*@*".
>
>What about if you have per user settings on the same domain ?
>
>So user1 at domain1.com and user2 at domain2.com ?

In that case, it would look up the rule for "*@*".

>Do i still need to split messages for that ?

If you want per-user settings to work 100% of the time across multiple
domains like this, you will still need to split messages.

>whats the impact on performance ?

Minimal.
If you aren't using this option at all or there is only 1 recipient, it
causes 3 "if" conditions to be checked every time an "all matches" value is
looked up that has a ruleset attached to it.
If you are using it then it might actually work faster than it did before
as it doesn't bother running through all the recipient addresses if it
knows it just needs to look up "*@domain.com" or "*@*".

I've written it as efficiently as I can, it even pre-compiles the regexps.
--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support