On Tuesday 26 October 2004 09:52, Trog shaped the electrons to say: > On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 03:45, Eric Worthy wrote: > > This is a vanilla install off qmailrocks.org site. > > This may be your problem. I seem to remember they are guilty of doing > very bad things to the clamav install, like linking clamdscan to > clamscan.
Why the hell would they want to suggest that?? This would totally limit the ability to scale. Are there any docs suggesting what the 'benefits' are? When I took over here at my current job, qmailscanner was setup to use clamscan instead of clamdscan. We send/receive over a million mails a day and the cpus were sitting at 100% constantly. The first thing i did was to change to clamdscan and cpu usage dropped unbelievably. -- +----------------------------------------------+ (0> Scott Ryan //\ Senior Unix/Linux Engineer V_/_ Telkom Internet - South Africa +----------------------------------------------+ He who controls the past, controls the future, He who controls the present, controls the past. - George Orwell, 1984 ================================================ _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
