From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Feb 19 20:08:59 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE58D16C9F7
	for <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:08:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com)
Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (p65-147.acedsl.com [66.114.65.147])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A6613C428
	for <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:08:59 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lists@stringsutils.com)
Received: from zoraida.natserv.net (localhost.natserv.net [127.0.0.1])
	by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904DEC2EC
	for <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:08:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix, from userid 58)
	id 52FE5C2E9; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:08:58 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on zoraida.natserv.net
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.3 required=4.0 tests=RCVD_IN_NOMOREFUNN,SPF_FAIL 
	autolearn=disabled version=3.1.7
X-Spam-Report: *  1.3 SPF_FAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (fail)
	* [SPF failed: Please see
	http://www.openspf.org/why.html?sender=lists%40stringsutils.com&ip=71.249.233.130&receiver=zoraida.natserv.net]
	* 2.0 RCVD_IN_NOMOREFUNN RBL: Received via a relay in No More Funn
	block *      list
	*      [71.249.233.130 listed in no-more-funn.moensted.dk]
Received: from 35st.simplicato.com
	(static-71-249-233-130.nycmny.east.verizon.net [71.249.233.130])
	by zoraida.natserv.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD5F0C163;
	Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:08:50 -0500 (EST)
References: <cone.1171556679.453588.55347.1000@zoraida.natserv.net>
	<i2hat2l2ml6q1bfhv1t8ja63ghu5jdkocv@4ax.com>
	<cone.1171743956.652183.78181.1000@zoraida.natserv.net>
	<200702172201.l1HM1BnR009915@lava.sentex.ca>
Message-ID: <cone.1171915729.745199.41200.5001@35st.simplicato.com>
X-Mailer: http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/
From: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>
To: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:08:49 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Clamav replacement for FreeBSD+postfix?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Services Providers <freebsd-isp.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp>,
	<mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-isp>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-isp@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp>,
	<mailto:freebsd-isp-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:08:59 -0000

Mike Tancsa writes:

>>Great. That sound promissing.
>>Is this with i386 or amd64?
> 
> i386.   clamav, spamassassin/mimedefang are all slower on amd64

Thanks for the feedback.
How much memory on your machine(s)?
Part of the reason I was thinking amd64 is because the servers have 4GB.
Doesn't one need PAE at 4GB and above?

We get our machines installed with FreeBSD and the vendor has been putting 
PAE on machines with 4GB, but I am wondering if it is even needed.
 
> We were using the dev version and prev release version out of the 
> ports and have now switched to .90. 

I see a port for it now. Will give it a try.

> .90.  Changing to libthr makes it work just fine.

Thanks again for all the feedback.