Sophos, other AVs

Nerijus Baliunas nerijus at USERS.SOURCEFORGE.NET
Mon Jan 27 19:12:38 GMT 2003

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:56:08 +0100 Oliver Siegmar <mailings at ULTIMATE-SYSTEMS.DE> wrote:

> >> I used am*v*s with kaspersky before. But am*v*s is crappy and
> >> kav seems to have a very stupid api but the price is just a
> >> quarter of f-prot. Are there any chances for a good kav support
> >> in mailscanner? Or would you totally discourage from kav?
> >
> > It works quite normally, what's the problem? Even kavdaemon
> > should work in next MS version.
> Oh, I didn't said that there is a problem. I just don't like
> kaspersky's api to the kavdaemon. What's up with performance when

Why don't you like it?

> I just use the scanner? But I guess the API (the overhead) takes
> more time than just launching the scanner (which is cached by the OS).

On a not very loaded server kavdaemon client is faster than
kavscanner. Fast example:

real        0m3.349s
user        0m2.600s
sys        0m0.109s

real        0m0.666s
user        0m0.018s
sys        0m0.008s

> But why is kav-support in beta if it 'works quite normally'? :-)

It is less tested than others.


More information about the MailScanner mailing list