MCP Efficiency?

Matt Kettler mkettler at
Fri Aug 18 18:48:35 IST 2006

Julian Field wrote:
> Sorry, just checked the code. I am doing that already.
> The cause of the problem is that SpamAssassin does not appear to support 
> the way I am trying to use it. I want 2 completely separate instances of 
> SpamAssassin. One has all the normal SA rules as expected. The other one 
> has no rules or dns checks or Razor or anything at all, it *only* has 
> the few rules specified for MCP checking.
> I can't make it do this, while still keeping all the rules compiled in 
> both instances and every setup done and cached. The only thing I can 
> make it do to run the way I want, is to tell it not to pre-compile all 
> the rules. As a result it has to do a huge load of SA compilation for 
> every message.
> If Matt Kettler is around, maybe he could offer me some advice. I have 
> tried asking on the SA list several times, and they don't understand why 
> I would want my 2nd instance at all, so I never got any helpful answers.

I am around, unfortunately, this is completely out of my domain.

I'm very familiar with SA configuration, rule writing, and how the behavior of
the code affects rules and configuration. However, I have almost no familiarity
with the perl API and making it do various things..

As an educated guess, I'd suggest you'd have to have to:

1) point rules_filename to a directory containing a single empty .cf file, or
perhaps just a copy of If the directory passed doesn't exist, SA may
wind up defaulting back to searching for a suitable equivalent to

2) set site_rules_filename to a directory containing just your MCP rules. Again,
this would have to exist or SA will probably search for a suitable equivalent to

3) userprefs_filename would also have to point to an empty file.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list