[Sqlgrey-users] Correction: Split of from_awl into dsn_awl needed

[Michael S. <Mic...@lr...>]

Sorry, mixed the numbers of entries wih the one of ip addrs:

On Sat, 7 May 2005, Michael Storz wrote:

> Analyzing our from_awl, I found the following:
>
> The table has 365.208 entries from 178.026 different ip addresses.
> From these ip addresses
>
> - 129.210 have exactly one entry and this is with sender_domain =
>   "-undef-"
> - 38.904 have only entries without sender_domain = "-undef-"
> - only 9.912 have entries with both kind of sender_domains
>
> If we split the from_awl in 2 tables
>
> - from_awl: sender_domain <> "-undef-"
> - dsn_awl:  sender_domain = "-undef-"
>
> we get a massive reduction of entries in the from_awl and also a massive
> reduction of table size, since we do not have to store sender_name and
> sender_domain in dsn_awl.
>
> In our case, dsn_awl would have 139.122 entries and from_awl 48.816

In our case, dsn_awl would have 139.122 entries/ip addresses and from_awl
226.086 entries from 48.816 ip addresses.

> entries. Since we know which table to query based on
> sender_domain/sender_name no additional table lookups are needed.
>
> Another advantage would be that the from_awl does not change so much as
> before, because all the DSNs which result as backscatter of the spammers
> are excluded now. And we could decide to use a different awl_age for the
> tables.
>
> If we include connect_awl, I don't think we need a split of this table,
> because the backscatter DSNs will propagate fast into the dsn_awl, only
> normal DSNs will stay in connect_awl.
>
> Michael Storz
> -------------------------------------------------
> Leibniz-Rechenzentrum   !   <mailto:St...@lr...>
> Barer Str. 21           !   Fax: +49 89 2809460
> 80333 Muenchen, Germany !   Tel: +49 89 289-28840
>

Michael Storz
-------------------------------------------------
Leibniz-Rechenzentrum   !   <mailto:St...@lr...>
Barer Str. 21           !   Fax: +49 89 2809460
80333 Muenchen, Germany !   Tel: +49 89 289-28840