On Wed, April 5, 2006 1:34 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:

> Where exactly the line is drawn is of little importance, but it's better
> to have a known limit with known consequences (REJECT) than an unknown
> limit with unknown consequences (server crash).

Of course.  All I wanted to say was don't dismiss this as irrelevant:
Having ClamAV's resource use being the limiting factor in these situations
doesn't help ClamAV.  The known limit should be able to be set with little
regard for one small component's processing problems.  Being able to
handle large files nicely would be an advantage ClamAV could advertise,
while not being able to is something that needs to get mentioned in
integration/install notes.

>From the original email, it appears ClamAV requires more available, real,
RAM than the largest file it will handle.  This would make me think when
installing: how *much* more RAM will it need?  What is the largest size
email I can handle on this machine based on that?  I might want to
reconfigure my email server.  Or I might want to turn off scanning over a
certain size.  Neither sounds like something I want to do while installing
a virus scanner.

Daniel T. Staal

---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author.  Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes.  This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

Reply via email to