> I've written the small java routine and done the > measurement, starting several times in a loop McAfee's > VirusScan on a directory with some pre-loaded executables, > on a 1.2GHz Pentium III CPU under Windows XP (my laptop): > Two cases: > 1) With 2 executables in the directory, for 537KB total, > it took 258 ms per execution. > 2) With a third large executable in the directory, for > 6.28MB total, it took 282 ms per execution. > > Considerations: > > 1) The size and number of files to scan don't seem to be > important. 2) As the files where pre-loaded and always the > same, they were in cache and so I didn't measure the I/O > time related to write them to the directory. 3) I think at > the end that the performance would not be so bad; we can > take also in account the fact that messages with > attachments are not statistically frequent, and in case we > scan only attachments and not the message body ... > > What do you think?
I would have thought more time spent processing so for me this looks good; however, I am a bit concerned woth the overall process of getting the mails to the scan directory and then back into the mail pipeleine. If I am not mistaken, attachments can be encoded in more then one format. Unless the VScanner can "read" those formats, they would need to be decoded in order to be processed, right ?? the process flow would(could) then be 1. regulate the copy of mails to a scan directory 2. decode various attachents if needed 3. initiate the scan process 4. flag the respective mails as clean or not 5. encode the various attachemnts 6. reinject the mails to the pipeleine 7. clean out the directory 8. open up the next batch ( goto 1 ) being able to store mail in one of the 'standard formats' would remove some of these steps - most virus scanners nowadays can read the 'standard mail formats'. not sure where james i on that though ... _______________________ thanks, alan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
