Stephen Gran wrote:
You are not authorized to access bug #736.
Hi Stephen,
please try again.
-aCaB
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:46:50PM +0100, aCaB said:
Stephen Gran wrote:
You are not authorized to access bug #736.
Hi Stephen,
please try again.
Works now, thanks.
--
--
| Stephen Gran | I invented
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Gran
Sent: donderdag 20 december 2007 17:14
To: clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] 0.92 and memory usage
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:46:50PM +0100, aCaB said:
Stephen Gran
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Blaise wrote:
Fabio,
We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
Chris
Chris,
The patch causes the acept() to FAIL.
Thu Dec 20 12:32:03 2007 - ERROR: accept() failed:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Kosin wrote:
Chris Blaise wrote:
Fabio,
We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
Chris
Chris,
The patch causes the acept() to FAIL.
Thu Dec 20 12:32:03 2007 - ERROR:
@lists.clamav.net
Subject: [Clamav-users] 0.92 and memory usage
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
35m).
Remains, however
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 02:36:32PM -0700, Chris Blaise said:
Fabio,
We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
You are not authorized to access bug #736.
Not all that helpful, in general.
--
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about 20%
faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to 35m).
Remains, however, the problem of icreased memory usage after DB reload:
This is my
Fabio Pedretti wrote:
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about 20%
faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to 35m).
Remains, however, the problem of icreased memory usage
Steven Stern wrote:
Fabio Pedretti wrote:
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
35m).
Remains, however, the problem of
Steven Stern wrote:
Fabio Pedretti wrote:
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
35m).
Remains, however, the problem of
Steven Stern wrote:
After 3 1/2 hours
2332 clamav20 0 216m 83m 1636 S0 4.1 0:21.52 clamd
It does seem to be growing
That's probably perfectly normal. Clamd uses pthreads. When it needs
to allocate space for a new thread's stack, it allocates memory.
When the thread exits,
12 matches
Mail list logo
