> Also, there is a huge speed difference between using clamscan > and clamdscan. While clamscan is very slow, I do not think > clamdscan is al least as fast as any other virus scanners.
I only find a speed difference between them in startup. Clamscan has to load the signature databases on every load, so for scanning a single file, it's terribly slow. But if you're scanning a lot of files, the startup time of clamscan becomes rather irrelevant and is generally offset by the communication time between clamdscan and clamd. As long as the same options are used by both, the scanning times should be virtually the same. And that has been my experience. In my email scanning environment (CommuniGate Pro server), it launches clamscan or clamdscan for every message. There it makes a big difference to use clamdscan. It would be even better if I wrote a proper client and requested the scan directly from clamd so it didn't have to launch a new program for every scan. But you gotta have time to write that or money to buy it... Bret _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-win32
