[Mimedefang] compare mimedefang to mailscanner

[Kenneth Irving]

I've found Sendmail+MIMEDefang+clamd+spamd a very efficient combination.
Tried Postfix+MailScanner+clamscan in another computer and it's very slow,
because Mailscanner doesn't work as a deamon, and doesn't use Clam as a
deamon either, but relies on running clamscan for every email. The overall
result is extremely slow.

Although I liked MailScanner, I would use it only in equipments with low
email traffic. Maybe in your equipment, with that email volume,
it'll work OK.

Today I'm using sendmail+mimedefang+clamd+spamd on a Pentium II 400 MHz
with 384 Mb RAM and it is handling between 10000 to 20000 emails per day
without problem. That would be absolutely impossible to handle with
Mailscanner unless I used a better server.

Hope you find the expirience useful.
best regards
			Kenneth


On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Mike Campbell wrote:

> I have been using mimedefang for a couple of years now and just today
> ran across the mailscanner program. On first glance it appears that the
> 2 do about the same thing. Have some of the experts here tried both of
> these and have a comparison as to how they differ? Is it worth my while
> to spend time trying to configure mailscanner?
>
> For what it is worth my mail server currently processes around 500-600
> messages a day on a P3 500 mhz machine with 128 meg of memory.
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
>  Mike Campbell
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
> message, it is NULL AND VOID.  You may ignore it.
>
> Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com
> MIMEDefang mailing list MIMEDefang at lists.roaringpenguin.com
> http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
>