On 10/10/07, Rob MacGregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've never yet seen clamd take anything close to that on emails. I > have to add SpamAssassin to the process to get anything close to that > kind of delay. > > As a quick test, I ran clamdscan against sample-nonspam.txt (that came > with SpamAssassin some time back) and it took 0.015s. > > Now, clamscan, that took 2.6s for the same scan (f-prot took 0.3s, > bitdefender a mind blowing 6.3). >
Well the timings I did locally on that simple email confirm what everyone else has been stating. Uvscan is slower than clamd. Either I have been transposing these two timing all this time or one of the clamav/clamd updates improved things. Going by everyone comments it sure seems like I have been transposing these numbers :/. These tests are all on a 64 bit platform with 64 bit uvscan and clamd btw. # time /usr/bin/clamdscan /tmp/sample-nonspam.txt real 0m0.012s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.001s # time uvscan /tmp/sample-nonspam.txt real 0m0.659s user 0m0.559s sys 0m0.078s # time /usr/bin/clamscan /tmp/sample-nonspam.txt real 0m1.931s user 0m1.732s sys 0m0.178s Even testing on a real email shows similar results: # time uvscan /tmp/Documentation.eml real 0m0.655s user 0m0.561s sys 0m0.071s # time clamdscan /tmp/Documentation.eml real 0m0.705s user 0m0.001s sys 0m0.001s # time clamscan /tmp/Documentation.eml real 0m2.380s user 0m2.187s sys 0m0.193s Thanks for setting me straight. Sorry for the mis-information everyone. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ AMaViS-user mailing list AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3 AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/