From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C2A7BC69 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 08:10:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from madbat.mine.nu (madbat.mine.nu [69.77.167.37]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l3D6Ai4U004786 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 08:10:45 +0200 Received: from cpe00045a73dc4b-cm00080d93c484.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ([74.97.128.161] helo=unicorn.ahiker.homeip.net) by madbat.mine.nu with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HcEzZ-0004B3-FX for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:10:41 -0400 Received: from itz by unicorn.ahiker.homeip.net with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HcEv6-00026A-NB; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:06:04 -0400 Sender: itz@madbat.mine.nu To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: [OT?] spamoracle concurrency From: Ian Zimmerman Date: 13 Apr 2007 02:06:04 -0400 Message-ID: <87ps68u7ub.fsf@unicorn.ahiker.homeip.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 461F1EE4.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; itz:01 slap:01 zimmerman:01 concurrency:02 ian:03 let:03 scheme:05 bonus:92 obvious:09 top:89 question:12 question:12 kind:13 kind:13 should:13 I couldn't find a forum specifically for spamoracle :-) The question is: does spamoracle do any kind of locking on the database? And what kind? Clearly, if I pipe my mails through "spamoracle mark" in my procmail (or maildrop, etc.) configuration, spamoracle may run and access the database at completely unpredictable times. Is it safe to do "spamoracle add" while this is enabled? Or do I have to slap a locking scheme on top myself? Bonus question, if locking is in fact done, does it let multiple "spamoracle mark" processes through at the same time (which should be safe)? I found to my dismay that none of the ~5 bayesian type filters I tried today answers these (obvious?) questions in their documentation :-( -- Experience with Asset Control an asset.