Wanting a pre-db4 bogofilter

[Karl Schmidt]

Matthias Andree wrote:

> 
> 
> MySQL has several, but none of this has any meaning to bogofilter, which
> does not use MySQL.
> 
I'm sorry, perhaps I haven't been clear enough - I'm not suggesting bogofilter 
use mysql -- that would be a "bad-thing"(TM). What I'm saying is mysql can use 
several different database storage engines. And yes, mysql can use Bdb just like 
bogofilter does, but there are reasons to look at the different ones, as one 
size does not fit all. Thus a look at the trade-offs of the different storage 
engines used in mysql could enlighten the choice for bogofilter including just 
the limited choice between Bdb3 and Bdb4.

My question still is does bogofilter need the added complexity of Bdb4? Is the 
advantage a practical advantage or a theoretical advantage? Right now I have 185 
1M log files in my db directory and it looks like I will have to set up yet 
another cron job to deal with it - this just seems to me that it isn't keeping 
with the KISS philosophy.

> exhibit A-C-I-D properties, as does Berkeley DB with
> transactional datastore mode. Berkeley DB without transactional mode,
> QDBM and TDB only exhibit the I (isolation) property.
> 
Yes, and if I understand bogofilter (not that I do completely)  could still work 
without any of the A-C-I-D (but probably could use the "D" which is provided by 
a Journaled file system (I think?))?

Have you looked at storage engines outside of Bdb?

Were there any performance hits with going from Bdb3 to Bdb4?

> bogofilter/bogoutil play dumb and the whole bogofilter or bogoutil
> process uses one huge transaction for almost all changes.
> 
> The Atomicity trait is helpful as we need to change either all of the
> .MSG_COUNT token and the individual tokens or none, for accuracy.

So you does bogofilter really need Atomicity or is it just "helpful"?

My points here I hope are taken kindly. Any Linux user is in danger of being a 
"complexity-junky"(TM) and I know I'm one myself. I have seen several software 
projects actually lose ground as time went by as the itch to make the project 
scope ever wider or use the latest version of a compiler ended up driving off 
the users (or customers in the commercial world). I don't want that to happen to 
bogofilter.

The bottom line is I  like bogofilter - I just don't see the advantage of moving 
Bdb3>4 that outweighs the problem of dealing with these log files. I'm hoping 
that looking at alternative storage engines might give bogofilter a way out?


----------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Schmidt                         EMail Karl at xtronics.com
Transtronics, Inc.    		       WEB http://xtronics.com
3209 West 9th Street                    Ph (785) 841-3089
Lawrence, KS 66049                     FAX (785) 841-0434


The secret of getting ahead is getting started. The secret of
getting started is breaking your complex overwhelming tasks into
small manageable tasks, and then starting on the first one.
--Mark Twain
----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Bogofilter mailing list
Bogofilter at bogofilter.org
http://www.bogofilter.org/mailman/listinfo/bogofilter