spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Pooser <dave...@pooserville.com>
Subject Re: BAYES_999 strange behavior
Date Tue, 18 Feb 2014 22:54:55 GMT
>It would make my life a lot easier if instead BAYES_999 were an additional
>rule.

That is, if BAYES_999 fired *in addition to* BAYES_99.

> I use several meta rules that include BAYES_99 and now I'm having to
>go rewrite those rules to include (BAYES_99 || BAYES_999).

Which raises the question-- is there a performance hit for making meta
rules include other meta rules? That is:

is
meta	_DP_BAYES_VBAD	(BAYES_99 || BAYES_999)
meta	DP_FRM_INFO_BAYES_VBD   DP_FRM_INFO && _DP_BAYES_VBAD

any worse from a performance standpoint than

meta	DP_FRM_INFO_BAYES_VBD   DP_FRM_INFO && (BAYES_99 || BAYES_999)

under normal conditions?

-- 
Dave Pooser
Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
"...Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in one pretty and well-preserved piece, but to slide across the
finish line broadside, thoroughly used up, worn out, leaking oil, and
shouting GERONIMO!!!" -- Bill McKenna





Mime
View raw message