You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by "Darren Honeyball [ML]" <ml...@spod.net> on 2004/03/07 01:10:21 UTC
sa-stats.pl problem
Running SA 2.63, sa-stats.pl, Solaris 9, qmail-1.03, qmail-scanner 1.20,
clamav 0.67
When I run sa-stats.pl I get the following output, and the figures are
way off:
bash-2.05# ./sa-stats.pl
Report Title : SpamAssassin - Spam Statistics
Report Date : %F
Period Beginning : Sat Mar 06 23:04:25 2004
Period Ending : Sun Mar 07 23:04:25 2004
Reporting Period : 24.00 hrs
--------------------------------------------------
Note: 'ham' = 'nonspam'
Total spam detected : 2 ( 14.29%)
Total ham accepted : 12 ( 85.71%)
-------------------
Total emails processed : 14 ( 1/hr)
Average spam threshold : 4.80
Average spam score : 14.70
Average ham score : -3.43
Spam kbytes processed : 8 ( 0 kb/hr)
Ham kbytes processed : 35 ( 1 kb/hr)
Total kbytes processed : 44 ( 2 kb/hr)
Spam analysis time : 12 s ( 1 s/hr)
Ham analysis time : 73 s ( 3 s/hr)
Total analysis time : 86 s ( 4 s/hr)
Statistics by Hour
-------------------------------------
Hour Spam Ham
-------------- -------- --------
%F, 23 1 12
%F, 00 1 0
%F, 01 0 0
%F, 02 0 0
%F, 03 0 0
%F, 04 0 0
%F, 05 0 0
%F, 06 0 0
%F, 07 0 0
%F, 08 0 0
%F, 09 0 0
%F, 10 0 0
%F, 11 0 0
%F, 12 0 0
%F, 13 0 0
%F, 14 0 0
%F, 15 0 0
%F, 16 0 0
%F, 17 0 0
%F, 18 0 0
%F, 19 0 0
%F, 20 0 0
%F, 21 0 0
%F, 22 0 0
%F, 23 0 0
Done. Report generated in 78 sec.
Re: sa-stats.pl problem
Posted by "Darren Honeyball [ML]" <ml...@spod.net>.
Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:08:06 -0500 "John Fleming" <jo...@wa9als.com> wrote:
>
>>From: "Darren Honeyball [ML]" <ml...@spod.net>
>>
>>>Running SA 2.63, sa-stats.pl, Solaris 9, qmail-1.03, qmail-scanner 1.20,
>>>clamav 0.67
>>>
>>>When I run sa-stats.pl I get the following output, and the figures are
>>>way off:
>>>
>>>bash-2.05# ./sa-stats.pl
>>>Report Title : SpamAssassin - Spam Statistics
>>>Report Date : %F
>>>Period Beginning : Sat Mar 06 23:04:25 2004
>>>Period Ending : Sun Mar 07 23:04:25 2004
>>
>>It looks like the period is into the future?
>
>
> Not if you're on GMT.
>
> The original problem looks like an issue with Solaris' strftime()
> function (or presuming that what's good enough for linux is good enough
> for Solaris.)
>
> Try using my version of sa-stats.pl at
> http://www.cynistar.net/~apthorpe/code/sa-contrib/sa-stats.pl
>
> It has some additional code that's not in the SA distribution and
> doesn't use "%F" with strftime(), possibly to solve this very problem.
>
> hth,
>
> -- Bob
Works a treat - thanks.
Re: sa-stats.pl problem
Posted by Bob Apthorpe <ap...@cynistar.net>.
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 22:10:54 -0500 Duncan Findlay <du...@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:48:41PM -0600, Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> > The original problem looks like an issue with Solaris' strftime()
> > function (or presuming that what's good enough for linux is good enough
> > for Solaris.)
> >
> > Try using my version of sa-stats.pl at
> > http://www.cynistar.net/~apthorpe/code/sa-contrib/sa-stats.pl
> >
> > It has some additional code that's not in the SA distribution and
> > doesn't use "%F" with strftime(), possibly to solve this very problem.
>
> BTW, patches are welcome...
I thought I submitted one (I'm not whining, honest...)
Ha! Found it:
http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2988
I may well be misunderstanding the patch submission process which could
explain why this has slipped through the cracks.
-- Bob
Re: sa-stats.pl problem
Posted by Duncan Findlay <du...@debian.org>.
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:48:41PM -0600, Bob Apthorpe wrote:
> The original problem looks like an issue with Solaris' strftime()
> function (or presuming that what's good enough for linux is good enough
> for Solaris.)
>
> Try using my version of sa-stats.pl at
> http://www.cynistar.net/~apthorpe/code/sa-contrib/sa-stats.pl
>
> It has some additional code that's not in the SA distribution and
> doesn't use "%F" with strftime(), possibly to solve this very problem.
BTW, patches are welcome...
--
Duncan Findlay
Re: sa-stats.pl problem
Posted by Bob Apthorpe <ap...@cynistar.net>.
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:08:06 -0500 "John Fleming" <jo...@wa9als.com> wrote:
> From: "Darren Honeyball [ML]" <ml...@spod.net>
> > Running SA 2.63, sa-stats.pl, Solaris 9, qmail-1.03, qmail-scanner 1.20,
> > clamav 0.67
> >
> > When I run sa-stats.pl I get the following output, and the figures are
> > way off:
> >
> > bash-2.05# ./sa-stats.pl
> > Report Title : SpamAssassin - Spam Statistics
> > Report Date : %F
> > Period Beginning : Sat Mar 06 23:04:25 2004
> > Period Ending : Sun Mar 07 23:04:25 2004
>
> It looks like the period is into the future?
Not if you're on GMT.
The original problem looks like an issue with Solaris' strftime()
function (or presuming that what's good enough for linux is good enough
for Solaris.)
Try using my version of sa-stats.pl at
http://www.cynistar.net/~apthorpe/code/sa-contrib/sa-stats.pl
It has some additional code that's not in the SA distribution and
doesn't use "%F" with strftime(), possibly to solve this very problem.
hth,
-- Bob
Re: sa-stats.pl problem
Posted by John Fleming <jo...@wa9als.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Darren Honeyball [ML]" <ml...@spod.net>
To: <sp...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 7:10 PM
Subject: sa-stats.pl problem
> Running SA 2.63, sa-stats.pl, Solaris 9, qmail-1.03, qmail-scanner 1.20,
> clamav 0.67
>
> When I run sa-stats.pl I get the following output, and the figures are
> way off:
>
> bash-2.05# ./sa-stats.pl
> Report Title : SpamAssassin - Spam Statistics
> Report Date : %F
> Period Beginning : Sat Mar 06 23:04:25 2004
> Period Ending : Sun Mar 07 23:04:25 2004
It looks like the period is into the future?