spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matus UHLAR - fantomas <>
Subject Re: High Performance Bayes Database Configuration?
Date Thu, 23 Jun 2011 08:29:43 GMT
>On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:03:57 +0100
>Dominic Benson <> wrote:
>> To be fair to MySQL, these days it is pretty solid. There are
>> potentially dangerous configuration options, but there are in
>> Postgres too, and you can turn them off. Have you had a bad
>> experience with a recent version?

On 21.06.11 15:17, David F. Skoll wrote:
>No, not really, but MySQL is broken in so many ways I try to stay away
>from it.  Many of the design flaws in
>remain unfixed.  For example, even in MySQL 5.0.5, 'select 1/0;'
>returns NULL. 

Pardon, but which of those apply when talking about using MySQL for bayes 

> PostgreSQL more sensibly raises an exception.  And
>while 5.0.5 no longer lets you insert '2003-02-31' into a DATE field,
>the INSERT command does not fail.  A SELECT gives you back 0000-00-00.
>Hence: I do not trust MySQL with my data.  (If an INSERT followed by a
>SELECT does not give me back exactly what I inserted, then the INSERT
>command *MUST FAIL* for me to trust the DB.)

2003-02-31 is INVALID date and therefore inserting it into the database and 
selecting back CAN NOT return the same data. If you want to get the same 
result, use (VAR)CHAR instead of date.

... again, does this affect BAYES?

Matus UHLAR - fantomas, ;
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
"Two words: Windows survives." - Craig Mundie, Microsoft senior strategist
"So does syphillis. Good thing we have penicillin." - Matthew Alton

View raw message