Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

Ketil Froyn wrote: > The reason that I have chosen clamscan rather than the clamdscan is > that I prefer not to have services running if I don't have to, in case > of memory leaks or hackability-issues or something like that. Are > these arguments broken (since you say there's never a good reason t

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

Jason Haar wrote: I really should just drop support for clamscan. There is *never* a good reason to use it!!! Figure out how to use clamd, and re-run Qmail-Scanner ./configure to detect and use clamdscan instead of clamscan. Also ensure you are running the current release of ClamAV, and also c

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

At 01:08 PM 11/18/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 12:50 PM 11/18/2005, Jason Haar wrote: I really should just drop support for clamscan. There is *never* a good reason to use it!!! huh? can you expand on that comment a little please? unless what you mean is drop support for clamscan, as op

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

At 12:50 PM 11/18/2005, Jason Haar wrote: I really should just drop support for clamscan. There is *never* a good reason to use it!!! huh? can you expand on that comment a little please? Paul Theodoropoulos http://www.anastrophe.com http://www.energynucleus.com http://www.smileglobal.com http

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

Ketil Froyn wrote: > $ ps aux | grep clam > qscand 30862 40.5 2.1 24352 21868 ? R10:40 70:11 > /usr/bin/clamscan -r -m --unzip --unrar --unzoo --lha > --disable-summary --max-recursion=10 --max-space=10 > /var/spool/qmailscan/tmp/serenity113230682749330813 I really should just dro

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I fee that, as a first measure, I would lower concurrencyincoming to the max number of parallel clam scans the machine will handle at reasonable loads That won't help much, because clamscan runs after qmail-smtpd has died. I might try to use clamd instead of clamscan

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

Ketil Froyn wrote: Hi, I looked in the archives and saw that Will Saxon reported an issue with scans taking too long. I am administering a small site where I have similar issues. My system: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 1GB RAM netqmail with realrcptto, syncdir, mfcheck, qregex patches clamav 0.84-2.s

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

>> Hi, >> >> I looked in the archives and saw that Will Saxon reported an issue with >> scans taking too long. I am administering a small site where I have >> similar issues. My system: >> >> >> Large mails apparently take a long time to finish scanning, and some >> appear never to finish.

Re: [Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

At 10:40 +0100 18-11-2005, Ketil Froyn wrote: Hi, I looked in the archives and saw that Will Saxon reported an issue with scans taking too long. I am administering a small site where I have similar issues. My system: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 1GB RAM netqmail with realrcptto, syncdir, mfcheck, qre

[Qmail-scanner-general]Problem with scans that take too long, another report

Hi, I looked in the archives and saw that Will Saxon reported an issue with scans taking too long. I am administering a small site where I have similar issues. My system: AMD Athlon 64 3200+ 1GB RAM netqmail with realrcptto, syncdir, mfcheck, qregex patches clamav 0.84-2.sarge.6 qmail-scanner