Can somebody explain the differences between clamavmodule vs clamd

[Steve Freegard]

Brent Bolin wrote:
> Performance, abilities etc...

clamavmodule:

advantages:

no daemon to crash

disadvantages:

memory usage; each MailScanner child has a full copy of the signatures
in memory.

Mail::ClamAV module breaks on each new release; it can take some time
for the author to fix these issues.

Requires MailScanner reload on signature update to reload the ClamAV
signatures.

clamd:

advantages:

far lower memory usage; as Clamd is threaded it only has one copy of the
signatures and each thread handles a connection from the MailScanner
children.

freshclamd can be used to update signatures; Clamd will get notified and
reload the signatures without interruption to service (although there
will be increased memory usage for a time).

More standard way of speaking to Clamd

disadvantages:

Daemon required to be running (it doesn't crash for me; others have had
issues with Sane sigs in the past), so service monitoring is required.

Regards,
Steve.