Glenn Steen glenn.steen at
Thu Sep 15 09:17:35 IST 2005

    [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set.  ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

On 15/09/05, Alex Neuman <alex at> wrote:
> Well, it can be faster to have a program that's always loaded and in
> memory scan the incoming datastream - but it MailScanner doesn't work that
> way. It receives a bunch of messages before it "wakes up", looks at the
> queue, scans everything from within perl using the module faster than it
> would be to individually feed everything to clamd, and dumps whatever's
> left after processing in the "real" queue. At least that's what I
> understand.
All the real difference is in the fork/exec of clamdscan (which you
cannot avoid in the clamd solution) ... Not much perhaps, but it'll
always give the edge to the perl module. And forking clamscan or
clamdscan for a batch.... doesn't really matter, since if you need
speed, the module is there to use.
So Julian definitely got this right, for MS. If MimeDefang could
benefit from the module to, I couldn't really say:-).

-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the Wiki ( and
the archives (

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list