From: "Steven Levine" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (HELO mail.2rosenthals.com) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.10) with ESMTPS id 8650623 for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 14:42:20 -0500 Received: from [192.168.200.201] (port=48501 helo=mail2.2rosenthals.com) by mail.2rosenthals.com with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1r99Os-0001T5-1h for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 14:42:10 -0500 Received: from mta-202b.earthlink-vadesecure.net ([51.81.232.241]:53803 helo=mta-202a.earthlink-vadesecure.net) by mail2.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1r99Op-0002yy-1O for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 14:42:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; bh=d1KzNDghav5kGZbZrp056GP1bMsyJX1/A55iea OgMs4=; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earthlink.net; h=from:reply-to:subject: date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-cc:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post: list-owner:list-archive; q=dns/txt; s=dk12062016; t=1701459726; x=1702064526; b=qCRQ3W42W9HQW02t3nrK8CbKVBn+nADRYzc2gNEzyIgnvQ5CdNDd8qN wVofQPBvNlyNOlEEFDKwcU6yjnGFB4As5iRbDGeE/Xt/m9NfNEgNqRaV8Elir5WUsZx7n25 ZZRZxwp9nrrnKx+YZFFuadR1qXXr1Ln+Z3N6nIoOfDfeHYgSrA8B2wzxrIDSR8vLEVPo9dX /ildB71Oq3o8GAw8+6ezFVxhRQled2MsVUktQWpliYxStLIMh83MH7xMj9yClXeumhCfCcT lTWa1N48opnoOQba8iG3BON4QsWOmmx8z/td3MV+XVzWT3hckzBReaX26tE2KvqQkdnwhG4 caA== Received: from slamain ([108.193.253.199]) by vsel2nmtao02p.internal.vadesecure.com with ngmta id 31b737bc-179ccc9b1f7a7313; Fri, 01 Dec 2023 19:42:06 +0000 Message-ID: <656a3145.5.mr2ice.fgrirsq@earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 11:17:25 -0800 To: "eCS ISP Mailing List" In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [eCS-ISP] clamscan issue X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v3.00.11.24/60 In , on 11/26/23 at 10:16 PM, "Massimo S." said: Hi Massimo, >it seems that clamscan have some difficulties scanning dirs with a lot of >files inside: >you can see some of these: cli_realloc(): Can't re-allocate memory to >25952256 bytes. and these: Unfortunately, I don't have any sure fire solutions to prevent clamscan from running out of memory. We already know it is very memory intensive and close to the limits of what OS/2 is capable of. Increasing VIRTUALADDRESSLIMIT might help. Another option is to shutdown non-essential applications while clamscan is running. Another is to do multiple clamscan runs where each run checks a subset of your directories ir files. The --exclude-dir=REGEX and --file-list=FILE options may help you configure this kind of setup. >X:/weasel/MailRoot/mydomain.com/info/O9GTJ5.MSG: Can't read file ERROR (i >don't understand "can't read file error, since the file is there on the >f.sys and it can be read) You are mixing apples and oranges, as we say. When clamscan runs out of memory, it may fail in any number of different ways. Inability open files is one possible failure. When clamscan runs out of memory it may or may not make the system unstable. If it doesn't, the rest of the system will continue to operate normally. Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" Warp/DIY/BlueLion etc. www.scoug.com www.arcanoae.com www.warpcave.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------