spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anthony Peacock <a.peac...@chime.ucl.ac.uk>
Subject Re: Bayesian filtering not kicking in, but it's trained.
Date Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:34:57 GMT
Hi,

RinkWorks wrote:
> 
> Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> don't you have turned bayes filtering off somewhere? use_bayes_rules 0?
>>
> 
> No.  That's what's so confusing.  But there's an update now.  Apparently at
> some point
> yesterday, BAYES tests just suddenly started showing up.  I wasn't doing
> anything at the
> time; it just suddenly started kicking in.  That doesn't make a whole lot of
> sense to me
> unless I had *just* autolearned enough spams and hams for Bayesian filtering
> to take hold.
> But as I say, I was hundreds of hams and thousands of spams over the minimum
> long before
> that.
> 
> So it's a mystery, I guess, but case closed.  But thank you very much for
> giving this matter
> your attention.

To me this sounds like the Bayes database you are looking at when you 
check the number of learnt messages is not the same one used when 
scanning emails.  Are you running the checks on the Bayes database as 
the same user that SA runs as normally?

-- 
Anthony Peacock
CHIME, Royal Free & University College Medical School
WWW:    http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhiajp/
"A CAT scan should take less time than a PET scan.  For a CAT scan,
  they're only looking for one thing, whereas a PET scan could result in
  a lot of things."    - Carl Princi, 2002/07/19

Mime
View raw message