[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling
From: |
Alberto L |
Subject: |
No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:33:09 -0800 |
Hi all,
I recently upgraded from Oort 0.24 to No 0.30 and my spam handling has
become quite slow. Here is my situation:
- I use nnfolder mail storage
my spam handling configuration (using bogofilter):
- splits spam into mail.spam.temp
- on exiting, spam in all groups is moved to mail.spam.save
- mail.spam.temp and mail.spam.save are spam groups
- the spam process destination for mail.spam.save is nil
When I enter mail.spam.temp to check for false spam positives, on
quitting it all spam-marked messages are moved to mail.spam.save.
This is quite slower with No 0.30 w.r.t. Oort 0.24 because,
apparently, both mail.spam.temp and mail.spam.save are written to
disk each time a single message is moved. With Oort 0.24 as far as I
can understand both groups are written to disk only once.
I include some bits of my spam configuration:
(setq
spam-split-group "mail.spam.temp"
spam-junk-mailgroups
'("mail.spam.temp" "mail.spam.save")
gnus-spam-process-newsgroups
'(
("^mail\\.incoming\\.....-..-..$"
((spam spam-use-bogofilter)))
("^mail\\.spam\\.train$"
;; ((spam spam-use-blacklist))
;; ((ham spam-use-whitelist))
((ham spam-use-bogofilter))
((spam spam-use-bogofilter)))
("^mail\\.spam\\.save$"
((ham spam-use-bogofilter)))
)
gnus-spam-process-destinations
'(
("^mail\\.spam\\.save$" nil)
("^mail\\..*$" "mail.spam.save")
)
gnus-ham-process-destinations
'(
("^mail\\.spam\\..*$" "mail.incoming.nospam")
)
)
Greetings,
--
Alberto
- No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling,
Alberto L <=