-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Kosin wrote:
> Chris Blaise wrote:
>> Fabio,
>
>> We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
>
>> https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
>
>> Chris
>
> Chris,
>
> The patch causes the acept() to FAIL.
>
> Thu Dec 20 12:32:03 2007
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Blaise wrote:
> Fabio,
>
> We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
>
> https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
>
> Chris
>
Chris,
The patch causes the acept() to FAIL.
Thu Dec 20 12:32:03 2007 -> ERROR: accept() failed:
à¹ØKÿ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Gran
Sent: donderdag 20 december 2007 17:14
To: clamav-users@lists.clamav.net
Subject: Re: [Clamav-users] 0.92 and memory usage
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:46:50PM +0100, aCaB said:
> Stephen G
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:46:50PM +0100, aCaB said:
> Stephen Gran wrote:
> > You are not authorized to access bug #736.
>
> Hi Stephen,
> please try again.
Works now, thanks.
--
--
| Stephen Gran | I inv
Stephen Gran wrote:
> You are not authorized to access bug #736.
Hi Stephen,
please try again.
-aCaB
___
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/18/2007 03:26 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Steven Stern wrote:
>
>> After 3 1/2 hours
>> 2332 clamav20 0 216m 83m 1636 S0 4.1 0:21.52 clamd
>> It does seem to be growing
>
> That's probably perfectly normal. Clamd uses pthreads
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 02:36:32PM -0700, Chris Blaise said:
> Fabio,
>
> We've seen this too. See if my patch helps.
>
> https://wwws.clamav.net/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=736
You are not authorized to access bug #736.
Not all that helpful, in general.
--
-
users@lists.clamav.net
Subject: [Clamav-users] 0.92 and memory usage
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
35m).
Remains, however
Steven Stern wrote:
> After 3 1/2 hours
> 2332 clamav20 0 216m 83m 1636 S0 4.1 0:21.52 clamd
> It does seem to be growing
That's probably perfectly normal. Clamd uses pthreads. When it needs
to allocate space for a new thread's stack, it allocates memory.
When the thread exits,
Steven Stern wrote:
> Fabio Pedretti wrote:
>
>> I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
>> 20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
>> The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
>> 35m).
>>
>> Remains, however, t
Steven Stern wrote:
> Fabio Pedretti wrote:
>
>> I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about
>> 20% faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
>> The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to
>> 35m).
>>
>> Remains, however, t
Fabio Pedretti wrote:
> I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about 20%
> faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
> The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to 35m).
>
> Remains, however, the problem of icreased memory usage
I just upgraded my servers after a little testing: 0.92 seems to be about 20%
faster than 0.91.2 and about 15% faster than 0.92rc2.
The initial memory usage seems to be a little improved also (from 36m to 35m).
Remains, however, the problem of icreased memory usage after DB reload:
This is my "t
13 matches
Mail list logo
