Did both report having scanned the same files/number of files? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 1:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [clamav-users] clamscan & clamd > > > > Thank you! > > Ok, so that brings me to the question of what would be the advantage of > using clamdscan/clamd versus simply using clamscan. > > I ran a simple test to compare the performance. > > I ran clamdscan 5 times on the clamscan install directory, got an average > of 2.22 seconds > Then I ran clamscan 5 times on the same directory, with an average of > 1.18 seconds, basically twice as fast! > > So should clamdscan+clamd only be used in scenarios where I have a > central clamav server? Because it seems the regular clamscan is > much faster. > > Ricardo > On Thu, 01 May 2003 10:01:09 +0200 Andreas Schmitz wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >If that's the case, then what is the client program for clamd? Is it > > >clamuko? I didn't quite understand. > > > > > > > > clamdscan is the client programm, which need clamd. > > > > Best Regards > > -- > > Andreas Schmitz > > AS-DataService <http://www.as-dataservice.de> > > Kastanienallee 24 > > D-54662 Speicher > > > > Tel.: (0 65 62) 93 05 17 > > Fax: (0 65 62) 93 05 18 > > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Ust-IdNr.: DE211466407 > > Handelsregister: HRA 1869 - Amtsgericht Bitburg > > <http://www.as-dataservice.de> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
