[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: antivirus recomendation?

On Thu, Nov 20, 2003 at 01:15:05PM -0500 or thereabouts, tallison@tacocat.net wrote:
> You can look into clamAV.
> But if SpamAssassin is too resource intensive I think you will find
> antivirus scanners to be even more so.
> clamav+spamassassin scanning in daemon mode takes 10-20 seconds per message.
> spamassassin scanning in daemon mode takes 2-3 seconds per message.
> This is based on a Pentiume-II 400MHz 512MB RAM.
> A very solid set-up that I have is to use postfix + amavisd-new + clamav +
> spamassassin.  It is a little intense in that it will readily suck up the
> better part of my 512MB of RAM.  But it does it all.
> However, I have to limit the processes to ~10.  Still tweaking the values.
> I'm not sure what resources you are worried about, but I've given you some
> stats to help you decide.  AntiVirus scanning is pretty intense work.

I know, which is why I didn't want to add to it with SA. I've ran SA b4
on a busy gateway, it's atrocious. Spamprobe, with it's Bayesian
filtering is much, much faster (written in C++).

Have you any experience at all with any of the following:
sanitizer, xbill, and amavis-ng? 

Thanks for your suggestion. I'm attempting to get some qualitative
feedback on the various binaries available to me. I've added a backports
source to my aptitude list, so I'm ready to get cracking.

When I was in school, I cheated on my metaphysics exam: I looked into
the soul of the boy sitting next to me.
                -- Woody Allen

Reply to: