On (20/11/03 23:39), Stephen wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:15:05PM -0500 or thereabouts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > You can look into clamAV. > > But if SpamAssassin is too resource intensive I think you will find > > antivirus scanners to be even more so. > > > > clamav+spamassassin scanning in daemon mode takes 10-20 seconds per message. > > spamassassin scanning in daemon mode takes 2-3 seconds per message. > > This is based on a Pentiume-II 400MHz 512MB RAM. > > > > > > A very solid set-up that I have is to use postfix + amavisd-new + clamav + > > spamassassin. It is a little intense in that it will readily suck up the > > better part of my 512MB of RAM. But it does it all. > > > > However, I have to limit the processes to ~10. Still tweaking the values. > > > > I'm not sure what resources you are worried about, but I've given you some > > stats to help you decide. AntiVirus scanning is pretty intense work. > > I know, which is why I didn't want to add to it with SA. I've ran SA b4 > on a busy gateway, it's atrocious. Spamprobe, with it's Bayesian > filtering is much, much faster (written in C++). > > Have you any experience at all with any of the following: > sanitizer, xbill, and amavis-ng? > > Thanks for your suggestion. I'm attempting to get some qualitative > feedback on the various binaries available to me. I've added a backports > source to my aptitude list, so I'm ready to get cracking. To deal with Swen - quite a few people on the list use mailfilter with fetchmail to remove the stuff before download. If you check the archives, therehas been quite a lot of posts on this.
Regards Clive -- http://www.clivemenzies.co.uk strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]