On 10/10/07, Adam65535 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In my experiences clamav/clamd is much slower than other mail scanners (even
> when up against command line scanners like uvscan). It is still a very
> useful virus scanner but not fast by any means. For an example... the
> command line scanner uvscan takes .15 seconds while clamav takes 2.6 seconds
> for the same email. This trend is throughout the logs.
I've never yet seen clamd take anything close to that on emails. I
have to add SpamAssassin to the process to get anything close to that
kind of delay.
As a quick test, I ran clamdscan against sample-nonspam.txt (that came
with SpamAssassin some time back) and it took 0.015s.
Now, clamscan, that took 2.6s for the same scan (f-prot took 0.3s,
bitdefender a mind blowing 6.3).
--
Please keep list traffic on the list.
Rob MacGregor
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he
doesn't become a monster. Friedrich Nietzsche
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
AMaViS-user mailing list
AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user
AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3
AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
