Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
:) Thank you! Joao - Original Message - From: Quey To: vchkpw@inter7.com Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow? If you goto www.clamav.net there is a link to it. I heard they corrected the problem you mention in current, but clam is still way to slow compared to other scanners so I don't use it anymore. Q João Luiz - Terra wrote: Sorry :( Do you know the address of clamav list? Regards, Joao - Original Message - From: Quey To: vchkpw@inter7.com Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow? maybe you would get an answer if you asked on clamav list ;-) João Luiz - Terra wrote: Hi all, I read that the clamav version clamav: 0.90.2 has a bad performance. Is right? Which the better version of clamav? See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta= Thank you Joao -- Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/10/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/5138 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ -- Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/10/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/5138 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
Hi Josh, Thank you, I use simscan and clamd. Thank you for information :) Regards, Joao - Original Message - From: Joshua Megerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vchkpw@inter7.com Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 10:16 PM Subject: Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow? On Wednesday 10 October 2007 08:13:29 pm Quey wrote: If you goto www.clamav.net there is a link to it. I heard they corrected the problem you mention in current, but clam is still way to slow compared to other scanners so I don't use it anymore. Q Are you using clamscan or clamd/clamdscan? If the former, that's why it's so slow - see if you can switch. Also, what interface to your AV software are you using? Something like qmail-scanner that's a perl script is much slower than qscanq or simscan, which doesn't have the overhead of launching perl with each invocation. One other hint - something I do for all my servers (I use simscan not, but I've also used it with qscanq in the past) is put the scanning directory onto a ramdisk (I use tempfs these days, but a true ramdisk would be even better if you can dedicate the memory to it). It prevents the excess disk I/O overhead that slows the process down, and since it's transient data anyway that shouldn't get through in case of an error, the fact that the scanning space isn't crash-proof is a non-issue... Josh -- Joshua Megerman SJGames MIB #5273 - OGRE AI Testing Division You can't win; You can't break even; You can't even quit the game. - Layman's translation of the Laws of Thermodynamics [EMAIL PROTECTED] Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/10/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/5138 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
maybe you would get an answer if you asked on clamav list ;-) João Luiz - Terra wrote: Hi all, I read that the clamav version clamav: 0.90.2 has a bad performance. Is right? Which the better version of clamav? See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta= Thank you Joao
Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
Sorry :( Do you know the address of clamav list? Regards, Joao - Original Message - From: Quey To: vchkpw@inter7.com Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:21 PM Subject: Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow? maybe you would get an answer if you asked on clamav list ;-) João Luiz - Terra wrote: Hi all, I read that the clamav version clamav: 0.90.2 has a bad performance. Is right? Which the better version of clamav? See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta= Thank you Joao -- Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/10/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/5138 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
If you goto www.clamav.net there is a link to it. I heard they corrected the problem you mention in current, but clam is still way to slow compared to other scanners so I don't use it anymore. Q João Luiz - Terra wrote: Sorry :( Do you know the address of clamav list? Regards, Joao - Original Message - *From:* Quey mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* vchkpw@inter7.com mailto:vchkpw@inter7.com *Sent:* Wednesday, October 10, 2007 7:21 PM *Subject:* Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow? maybe you would get an answer if you asked on clamav list ;-) João Luiz - Terra wrote: Hi all, I read that the clamav version clamav: 0.90.2 has a bad performance. Is right? Which the better version of clamav? See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta http://www.google.com/search?hl=pt-BRrlz=1T4GGIH_pt-BRBR206BR207q=clamav%3A+0.90.2+slowmeta= Thank you Joao Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra http://mail.terra.com.br/. Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/10/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/5138 Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
Re: [vchkpw] clamav: 0.90.2 is slow?
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 08:13:29 pm Quey wrote: If you goto www.clamav.net there is a link to it. I heard they corrected the problem you mention in current, but clam is still way to slow compared to other scanners so I don't use it anymore. Q Are you using clamscan or clamd/clamdscan? If the former, that's why it's so slow - see if you can switch. Also, what interface to your AV software are you using? Something like qmail-scanner that's a perl script is much slower than qscanq or simscan, which doesn't have the overhead of launching perl with each invocation. One other hint - something I do for all my servers (I use simscan not, but I've also used it with qscanq in the past) is put the scanning directory onto a ramdisk (I use tempfs these days, but a true ramdisk would be even better if you can dedicate the memory to it). It prevents the excess disk I/O overhead that slows the process down, and since it's transient data anyway that shouldn't get through in case of an error, the fact that the scanning space isn't crash-proof is a non-issue... Josh -- Joshua Megerman SJGames MIB #5273 - OGRE AI Testing Division You can't win; You can't break even; You can't even quit the game. - Layman's translation of the Laws of Thermodynamics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
