clamavmodule or clamd ?

[Rick Cooper]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info 
> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On Behalf 
> Of Denis Beauchemin
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 9:29 AM
> To: MailScanner discussion
> Subject: Re: clamavmodule or clamd ?
> 
> Eddie Hallahan a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We currently run a chunk of servers and am having real 
> grief with the
> > perl clamav module.  Our servers currently use clamavmodule in their
> > scanning.  What would be the issues if we switched to clamd 
> - i.e. would
> > this slow things down/speed them up, not make a difference?
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >   
> 
> Eddie,
> 
> We switched to clamd a while ago and noticed that MS uses 
> much less RAM: 
> each child had its own copy of Clam loaded into RAM with 
> clamavmodule; 
> now with clamd, only one instance is running.  It definitely 
> is not slower!
> 
> Be aware, though, that with the external phishing signatures, 
> clamd has 
> a tendency to crash some times each day so make sure to 
> monitor it and 
> restart it as soon as it dies.  I've heard people are using monit to 
> this task (http://mmonit.com/monit/).
> 
> Denis
> 

I have not experienced crashing do to 3d party signatures, ever.
If you are using a proper D/L script it should be checking the
Files before moving them into use. I did have a problem with
The official signatures a while back however.


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.