On Wed, July 8, 2015 5:09 pm, Jingo Administrator wrote: > Well, I agree my hardware isn't rather stunning and doesn't help to > (dramatically) reduce the time it takes for clamav to reload the > database. I will draw my conclusion and start to drop the 3rd party sigs.
What signatures (3rd Party) are you using... some of the, do take more memory and are slower to process than others. Using a very simple scan on one file, here's how the dbs compare... foxhole_filename.cdb 1062 ms doppelstern-phishtank.ndb 1078 ms foxhole_all.cdb 1078 ms doppelstern.hdb 1093 ms doppelstern.ndb 1093 ms spamimg.hdb 1093 ms winnow.complex.patterns.ldb 1093 ms winnow_bad_cw.hdb 1093 ms winnow_extended_malware_links.ndb 1093 ms bofhland_phishing_URL.ndb 1094 ms crdfam.clamav.hdb 1094 ms rogue.hdb 1094 ms spam.ldb 1094 ms spamattach.hdb 1094 ms spearl.ndb 1094 ms winnow.attachments.hdb 1094 ms bofhland_malware_URL.ndb 1109 ms foxhole_generic.cdb 1109 ms lott.ndb 1109 ms winnow_extended_malware.hdb 1109 ms winnow_malware.hdb 1109 ms winnow_spam_complete.ndb 1125 ms bofhland_malware_attach.hdb 1141 ms jurlbla.ndb 1141 ms porcupine.ndb 1156 ms winnow_malware_links.ndb 1157 ms blurl.ndb 1187 ms jurlbl.ndb 1188 ms scam.ndb 1391 ms phishtank.ndb 1578 ms spear.ndb 1640 ms bofhland_cracked_URL.ndb 1734 ms winnow_phish_complete.ndb 1750 ms junk.ndb 1765 ms winnow_phish_complete_url.ndb 1766 ms phish.ndb 3422 ms scamnailer.ndb 6031 ms Cheers, Steve Web : sanesecurity.com Blog: sanesecurity.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
