Has anyone else seen clamscan takeup 99% cpu

Peter Lemieux mailscanner at replies.cyways.com
Fri Feb 12 18:26:25 UTC 2016

We also use clamd, and it is definitely much faster than running clamscan on 
each message.  In our implementation, clamd is also supporting SquidClamAV 
which scans every object downloaded via the "transparent" Squid proxy 
running on the same machine.  Even with both MailScanner and 
SquidClamAV+c-icap making calls to clamd, it usually stays below 20% CPU 
usage.  (This is a dual-Xeon machine which I'm sure helps a lot!  It shows a 
long-term load average of just 0.5.)


On 02/12/2016 01:12 PM, Moris Kod wrote:
> I would recommend setting up clamd.   I'm running this with 3rd party
> definitions and
> have minimal impact on server performance and cpu.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Philip Parsons <pparsons at techeez.com>
> *To:* MailScanner Discussion <mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2016 6:42 PM
> *Subject:* Has anyone else seen clamscan takeup 99% cpu
> I have update mailscanner to the latest and clamav .99 and now when there is
> 30 messages clamscan take all the cpu ? any idea’s
> Thank you.
> Philip Parsons

More information about the MailScanner mailing list