Hi there, On Thu, 1 Oct 2020, Dave Sill via clamav-users wrote:
It looks like my point was lost in the noise ...
Sorry, I guess it was late and I was in a hurry to get to bed. :(
The cache only saved a little over a minute on a 24 minute scan.
I tried something similar here on a directory with only 4k files: ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- Infected files: 63 Time: 831.193 sec (13 m 51 s) Start Date: 2020:10:01 13:05:29 End Date: 2020:10:01 13:19:21 ----------- SCAN SUMMARY ----------- Infected files: 63 Time: 55.386 sec (0 m 55 s) Start Date: 2020:10:01 13:33:15 End Date: 2020:10:01 13:34:10 The infected files were expected. Maybe some more experimentation is called for. I'm running something with more and much larger files as I write.
... on a much smaller scan, the cache made a huge difference. That tells me that the cache isn't large enough to significantly speed up large scans.
It might be too soon to draw that conclusion. It's possible that the daemon reloaded its database during your test, and I'd expect that to cause any cached results to be discarded for obvious reasons.
I don't see that the cache size is run-time configurable. Is that right?
Correct, but I'd thought its size would be limited only by the RAM you have free. If you look at the code in libclamav/cache.c you can see that struct cache_set is just a few pointers, and if you only have 69k files under your home directory I wouldn't expect storage of that many sets of pointers to be an issue. I'll dig into this a bit more when I have chance if somebody doesn't beat me to it. -- 73, Ged. _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
