Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on May 24, 2006 12:47 AM
I've never looked at clamav... is it really this slow just to fine the eicar test?
ClamAV took much longer than F-Prot (seven minutes and 50 seconds for ClamAV compared to 29 seconds for F-Prot)
No, read that again... 7:50 vs 0:29. (and the linux.com subs could do with a better style guide... numbers never write numbers as words for numerical data, and if you do use a number spelt out somewhere in a sentence, you normally spell out all numbers after that in the same sentence, but we digress)
Now... a point that the author might be able to clarify: I presume that test was run a few times so that definitions were cached by the kernel fs layer etc. That can make a big difference to benchmarks. (but probably not that big!)
Anyone interested in contacting the clamav devs and discussing an optimisation project?
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Speed difference
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 24, 2006 12:47 AMI've never looked at clamav... is it really this slow just to fine the eicar test?
No, read that again... 7:50 vs 0:29. (and the linux.com subs could do with a better style guide... numbers never write numbers as words for numerical data, and if you do use a number spelt out somewhere in a sentence, you normally spell out all numbers after that in the same sentence, but we digress)
Now... a point that the author might be able to clarify: I presume that test was run a few times so that definitions were cached by the kernel fs layer etc. That can make a big difference to benchmarks. (but probably not that big!)
Anyone interested in contacting the clamav devs and discussing an optimisation project?
#