Jingo Administrator wrote:
Already more than a week ago I posted my first question to the list. I
must admit I'm a bit disappointed that nobody responds. Is it that I
asked a silly question? Or is the issue just to hard to solve and just
nobody wants to burn his fingers on it?
On 07/07/2015
Apologies for cross posting. This question is about Exim and clamd.
Specifically, how can we deal with a clam daemon that’s unresponsive (for five
minutes) while updating rules. The obvious thing would be to wait a bit longer
rather than time out, but I can’t see a control for that. I have some
On 7/7/2015 4:31 PM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Jingo Administrator wrote:
Already more than a week ago I posted my first question to the list. I
must admit I'm a bit disappointed that nobody responds. Is it that I
asked a silly question? Or is the issue just to hard to solve and just
nobody wants to
The system is a VIA PC3500G Motherboard with an onboard VIA Esther
processor 1500MHz. So, indeed, nothing special or heavy, I know,
although it's dedicated:-) . Scanning is not the bottleneck, reloading
the database is. Before this server I had a much slower system with a
VIA C3 processor and 512
It seems to be the elephant in the room, but the root cause of your problem is
you have a resource-constrained system. You don't have enough RAM or CPU to do
what you want. I had the same problem with older Solaris systems running SPARC
processors and no amount of cleverness on my part helped.
On 7/8/2015 11:11 AM, Jingo Administrator wrote:
The system is a VIA PC3500G Motherboard with an onboard VIA Esther
processor 1500MHz. So, indeed, nothing special or heavy, I know,
although it's dedicated:-) . Scanning is not the bottleneck, reloading
the database is. Before this server I had a
On 7/8/15 8:11 AM, Jingo Administrator wrote:
Scanning is not the bottleneck, reloading
the database is.
Because you're wrong about this you cannot correct the real problem. The
bottleneck is the platform. Nothing else.
dp
___
Help us build a
Well, I agree my hardware isn't rather stunning and doesn't help to
(dramatically) reduce the time it takes for clamav to reload the
database. I will draw my conclusion and start to drop the 3rd party
sigs. But no matter how much I can narrow down the problem of the reload
time, and now I come
On 08/07/15 17:33, Rafael Ferreira wrote:
Well, the progress you see is likely to be transfer, not processing, time
since that’s where most time is going to be spent for a sizable file anyways
(under normal circumstances) so I doubt clamd is your main latency source
here.
? I said clam was
