[spambayes-bugs] [ spambayes-Bugs-936529 ] Spambayes has poor performance

[SourceForge.net]

Bugs item #936529, was opened at 2004-04-17 04:36
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by mhammond
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=936529&group_id=61702

Category: Outlook
Group: Binary 1.0a9 (0.9)
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Brad Byrd (bbyrd1)
Assigned to: Mark Hammond (mhammond)
Summary: Spambayes has poor performance

Initial Comment:
I'm running a 2.4ghz P4 prosessor with 512MB of ram 
and spambayes is running very slow after i upgrade to 
office xp sp3. However before it ran just fine. Just a 
side note i'm running Windows XP PRO SP2 RC1 i'm also 
running the latest (april) release.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Mark Hammond (mhammond)
Date: 2004-05-05 09:06

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=14198

Can you please qualify "on the slow side"?  What exactly is
slow, and how slow? How long does it take to train a single
message, for example? 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Brad Byrd (bbyrd1)
Date: 2004-05-05 04:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=561013

It still is running on the slow side.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Mark Hammond (mhammond)
Date: 2004-05-04 09:59

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=14198

Brad - did you try Tony's suggestion of doing a full
re-train so see if that solved the problem?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin)
Date: 2004-04-23 11:27

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=552329

The log doesn't have any errors in it, but interesting it
does show that there is a fairly small amount of ham and
spam trained.  I wonder whether this is perhaps due to the
problem discussed (by me and Tim Peters) on the list recently.

If it is, then the two solutions that spring to mind are (a)
retrain from a fresh db, because that fixed the problem for
both me and Tim, or (b) wait and see if my further
investigation into this yields anything.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Brad Byrd (bbyrd1)
Date: 2004-04-22 17:51

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=561013

Ok here is the log file yop requested

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin)
Date: 2004-04-22 11:15

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=552329

Eek.  I don't know how that happened, but this got entered
into the wrong tracker.  Ignore all of that.

For *this* problem: we need to see the log file.  Please
attach it to this tracker.  You could also try retraining
and seeing if that helps (see recent spambayes mailing list
messages with "sloth" in the subject).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin)
Date: 2004-04-22 11:12

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=552329

Interesting.  This appears to be a sf-wide change.  Not only
the page above, but all other release notes on sourceforge
no longer work with html tags.  I wonder if this was them
fixing a bug that allowed it, or introducing a bug doing
something else.

I'll look into this some more and if necessary change the
SpamBayes 1.0a9 and 1.0b1 notes to plain text.  For the
moment, the release notes are more-or-less the same as the
message posted to spambayes-announce (so in the archives for
that list) and the changelog is in the archive or in CVS
(accessible via the web).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=936529&group_id=61702