Continuing saga of ClamAV module
mgt at stellarcore.net
Fri Apr 13 14:50:31 IST 2007
> With the recurring clamavmodule problems of late, has anybody started just
> using clamav direct rather than the module?
> Is there a huge speed increase to be gained in using the module, or a big
> saving on resources?
Yes my solution to the last problem was to swtich to clamav only because
it was the fix that worked before I really understood the problem. But
clamav is using commandling line clamscan which is much slower then
clamavmodule. The problem is everytime you call [fork] a new clamscan it
has to load the virus database which is over 100,000 records.
One possible solution that it might time to revisit is making a new
wrapper for clamdscan and starting the clamd daemon. I know this has
been mentioned before but I forgot what the issue was with it. I know
that Mail::ClamAV aka clamavmodule was a nicely intergrated solution for
MailScanner but as you mentioned we keeping seeing it as the weakest
link. If clamdscan + clamd allow more stability during upgrades [both of
the sig database and the engine] then maybe it is time to switch.
[I know it would be pretty easy to copy the clamav.wrapper and change to
use clamdscan, I might test this out soon.]
More information about the MailScanner