On Monday 04 June 2007, BG Mahesh wrote:
Since many users had performance issues with the latest version of clamav we
thought of postponing the upgrade.
Wed May 30 23:24:29 CEST 2007
-
V 0.90.3
* Bugfixes:
skip
- libclamav/matcher-ac.c: optimize memory
Hi,
I'm using clamav 0.90.2 on Linux.
Today I found this entry on my clamd.log :
Mon Jun 4 13:06:46 2007 - Reading databases from /var/clamav
Mon Jun 4 13:07:40 2007 - Loaded 237246 signatures.
Odd. Last I check manually it was 100-thousand-something. Tracing back
clamd.log, the oldest entry I
On 6/4/07, Fajar A. Nugraha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# ls -sR1 /var/clamav.bad
9145 main.cvd
0 main.inc
You have both a main.inc, and a main.cvd. Thus those signatures are
loaded twice.
This problem has been discussed on this list a while ago, look in the archives.
--Edwin
On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 11:13 +0530, BG Mahesh wrote:
hi
We are using clamav-0.90.1 on Linux. Emails that are infected with
[EMAIL PROTECTED] are getting thru. Norton on our PC has been detecting
it.
Any idea what needs to be done to fix this problem? Since many users had
performance issues
So, I'm not so sure if this is ClamAV related. Maybe this doesn't
belong here... I'll continue searching.
Are you using clamscan instead of clamdscan? That could be
the reason for your trouble. Both programs take a long time to start
up, easily long enough to overrun a timeout.
Long
Rob Sterenborg wrote:
Yes I'm aware of that. But.. clamdscan was as slow as clamscan as
clamavmodule.
I would suggest that you either use clamdscan or clamavmodule. The time
required for clamscan to load virus signatures (100 thousand or so) is
enough (20-something seconds on my system) to
Yes I'm aware of that. But.. clamdscan was as slow as clamscan as
clamavmodule.
I would suggest that you either use clamdscan or clamavmodule. The
time required for clamscan to load virus signatures (100 thousand or
so) is enough (20-something seconds on my system) to justify the
choice.
On Monday 04 June 2007 03:23, Rob Sterenborg wrote:
Yes I'm aware of that. But.. clamdscan was as slow as clamscan as
clamavmodule.
I would suggest that you either use clamdscan or clamavmodule. The
time required for clamscan to load virus signatures (100 thousand or
so) is enough
On 6/2/07, Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Noel, I started seeing the same problem this evening with ClamAV
0.90.3. I finally had to recompile with --disable-experimental and
everything has run fine here since. I wonder if you disable the
experimental sections in the clamd.conf file if
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 13:02:54 +0200
Tomasz Kojm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:22:48 -0500
Noel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recompiled clamav without --enable-experimental and still have the
error. It's unclear if this flag does anything interesting right now
Upgraded from ClamAV 0.88.7 to 0.90.3 on FreeBSD4.x. All seems stable,
but after the change I notice that when clamd reloads/re-reads the
database, it seems incoming streams are held up longer than expected and
clients timeout on the connection. (currently set to 10 seconds)
When the database
At 04:44 PM 6/4/2007, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 13:02:54 +0200
Tomasz Kojm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 00:22:48 -0500
Noel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recompiled clamav without --enable-experimental and still have the
error. It's unclear if this flag
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Noel Jones wrote:
BTW, I'm *very* impressed with the db load speed improvements in
0.91rc1.
I agree. The load speed for 0.92 had me considering rolling back to 0.88,
but 0.91rc1 is a tremendous improvement. Thanks for a great service.
Jeffrey Moskot
System Administrator
Just to add to this...
ClamAV 0.88.7 - Reading/loading of the virus database (~94k signatures)
took only 2-3 seconds.
ClamAV 0.90.3 - 26-30 seconds. (122k signatures)
Same hardware/OS, no additional changes. Does this seem about right?
If so, it's causing clamd stream clients to hold up
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Robert Blayzor wrote:
Just to add to this...
ClamAV 0.88.7 - Reading/loading of the virus database (~94k signatures)
took only 2-3 seconds.
ClamAV 0.90.3 - 26-30 seconds. (122k signatures)
Same hardware/OS, no additional changes. Does
René Berber wrote:
The timeout is caused by clamd taking 100% of the CPU for those 30 seconds, if
you cannot increase the value then perhaps using 0.91rc1 is a better option
(reloading databases is 10x faster, yep back to the 3 sec mark).
That's fine. All I really wanted to know. I'll wait
Robert Blayzor wrote:
René Berber wrote:
The timeout is caused by clamd taking 100% of the CPU for those 30 seconds,
if
you cannot increase the value then perhaps using 0.91rc1 is a better option
(reloading databases is 10x faster, yep back to the 3 sec mark).
That's fine. All I really
Hi,
I'm using clamav-0.91rc1 on Solaris10/sparc.
I encountered a problem during database update (running freshclam
manually) today
# freshclam
ClamAV update process started at Tue Jun 5 10:01:21 2007
main.inc is up to date (version: 43, sigs: 104500, f-level: 14, builder:
sven)
ERROR: getfile:
Török Edvin wrote:
On 6/4/07, Fajar A. Nugraha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
# ls -sR1 /var/clamav.bad
9145 main.cvd
0 main.inc
You have both a main.inc, and a main.cvd. Thus those signatures are
loaded twice.
Hi Edwin,
thanks for your response.
I use home-made rpm package
19 matches
Mail list logo
