On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 at 13:38:54 -0600, Noel Jones wrote: > [...] > Very generally expect 10x or so speed improvement using clamdscan rather > than clamscan with an MTA, but results will vary widely. Your reported > scan time improvement seems quite possible. >
A simple comparison (very rough, but shows the idea): $ time clamscan /etc/services /etc/services: OK ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- [...] Data scanned: 0.01 Mb I/O buffer size: 131072 bytes Time: 0.721 sec (0 m 0 s) real 0m0.726s user 0m0.680s sys 0m0.040s $ time clamdscan /etc/services /etc/services: OK ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- Infected files: 0 Time: 0.008 sec (0 m 0 s) real 0m0.012s user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.000s Depending on which times one compares, one gets: 0.721/0.008 ~= 90 or: 0.726/0.012 ~= 60. You can see the difference! ;-) -- Tomasz Papszun SysAdm @ TP S.A. Lodz, Poland | And it's only [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lodz.tpsa.pl/ | ones and zeros. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ClamAV.net/ A GPL virus scanner ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software. Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms. Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html _______________________________________________ Clamav-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clamav-users
