MCP Efficiency?

[Glenn Steen]

On 19/08/06, Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com> wrote:
> Glenn Steen spake the following on 8/18/2006 8:03 AM:
> > On 18/08/06, Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 18/08/06, Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 18/08/06, Julian Field <MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> > > Hash: SHA1
> >> > >
> >> > > 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.
> >> > >
> >> > This is exactly what I suspected from the few trials I did recently
> >> > (was thinking of starting to use MCP). And that is where I got the
> >> > idea to set dns as unavailable. Helps some, but not all.
> >> >
> >> > The problems lie solidly in the built-in defaults that you cannot
> >> override.
> >> > What I think you have to do is to maintain a "cleaned" SA environment,
> >> > and see to it that MCP uses it by way of a chroot thingie. Really
> >> > icky:-(.
> >> >
> >> Replying to myself after actually reading your code and the code of
> >> the spamassassin command, as well as engaging brain just a tad (I
> >> might be fooling myself here:-)...
> >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but whatr you do in MCP.pm should be
> >> equivalent to calling spamassassin like:
> >> # spamassassin -D --lint -C /etc/MailScanner/mcp
> >> --siteconfigpath=/etc/MailScanner/mcp -p
> >> /etc/MailScanner/mcp/mcp.spam.assassin.prefs.conf 2>&1 | less -e
> >>
> >> .... or something very similar.
> >> That shouldn't get the effect you cite, nor the effect I (wrongly)
> >> observed. It should work IMO (so no need for extreme measures:-).
> >> Or am I totally missing something here?
> >>
> > Ah, just saw the light. Stupid me, please ignore....:-).
> >
> Glen is replying to himself again!
> Did a Postfix upgrade come out or something? ;-)
>
The compulsive "replying to oneself" behaviour is dictateb by the use
of Postfix.... Not it's release schedule:-):-)
.... Or just by me being a bit slow... Couldn't even claim "hangover"
as the reason for that... Just sloppy reading/understanding.:-)

Somewhat more on-topic... Is the solution to this MCP problem to
redisgn MCP? Make it use some other package (not that I would suggest
any particular one), or ... Perhaps one could use the groundwork done
for the phishing net to make something workable for MCP. After all,
does it really have to be SA doing it? Just a thought.
-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se