From: "Massimo S." Received: from [192.168.100.201] (HELO mail.2rosenthals.com) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.10) with ESMTPS id 8671236 for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 14:51:41 -0500 Received: from secmgr-va.2rosenthals.com ([50.73.8.217]:34678 helo=mail2.2rosenthals.com) by mail.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1r9sV1-0000eX-0Q for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 14:51:31 -0500 Received: from mail2.quasarbbs.net ([80.86.52.115]:10161) by mail2.2rosenthals.com with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1r9sUw-0005G5-0p for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 14:51:26 -0500 X-SASI-Hits: BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_1100_1199 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0.000000, CTE_8BIT 0.000000, HTML_00_01 0.050000, HTML_00_10 0.050000, IN_REP_TO 0.000000, LEGITIMATE_SIGNS 0.000000, MSGID_SAMEAS_FROM_HEX_844412 0.100000, MSG_THREAD 0.000000, NO_CTA_URI_FOUND 0.000000, NO_URI_HTTPS 0.000000, REFERENCES 0.000000, REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM 0.000000, SENDER_NO_AUTH 0.000000, SUSP_DH_NEG 0.000000, TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.500000, __ANY_URI 0.000000, __BODY_NO_MAILTO 0.000000, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0.000000, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0.000000, __CRYPTO_ADDRESS_OBFU 0.000000, __CT 0.000000, __CTE 0.000000, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_DOMAIN 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_HEUR 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_IP 0.000000, __FORWARDED_MSG 0.000000, __FROM_DOMAIN_NOT_IN_BODY 0.000000, __FROM_NAME_NOT_IN_ADDR 0.000000, __FROM_NAME_NOT_IN_BODY 0.000000, __FUR_HEADER 0.000000, __HAS_FROM 0.000000, __HAS_MSGID 0.000000, __HAS_REFERENCES 0.000000, __HAS_REPLYTO 0.000000, __HEADER_ORDER_FROM 0.000000, __IN_REP_TO 0.000000, __MAIL_CHAIN 0.000000, __MIME_BOUND_CHARSET 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_P 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_P1 0.000000, __MIME_VERSION 0.000000, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT 0.000000, __MSGID_HEX_844412 0.000000, __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW 0.000000, __PHISH_SPEAR_SUBJ_ALERT 0.000000, __REFERENCES 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ACC 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ADDY 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_DOMAIN 0.000000, __SANE_MSGID 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG2 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG_HEUR 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG_HEUR2 0.000000, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0.000000, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0.000000, __SUBJ_REPLY 0.000000, __TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.000000, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0.000000, __TO_NAME 0.000000, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC 0.000000, __TO_REAL_NAMES 0.000000, __URI_MAILTO 0.000000, __URI_NO_WWW 0.000000, __URI_NS 0.000000, __USER_AGENT 0.000000, __WEBINAR_PHRASE 0.000000 X-SASI-Probability: 10% X-SASI-RCODE: 200 X-SASI-Version: Antispam-Engine: 5.1.4, AntispamData: 2023.12.3.192716 X-SASI-Hits: BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_1100_1199 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0.000000, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS 0.000000, CTE_8BIT 0.000000, HTML_00_01 0.050000, HTML_00_10 0.050000, IN_REP_TO 0.000000, LEGITIMATE_SIGNS 0.000000, MSGID_SAMEAS_FROM_HEX_844412 0.100000, MSG_THREAD 0.000000, NO_CTA_URI_FOUND 0.000000, NO_URI_HTTPS 0.000000, REFERENCES 0.000000, REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM 0.000000, SUSP_DH_NEG 0.000000, TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.500000, __ANY_URI 0.000000, __AUTH_RES_PASS 0.000000, __BODY_NO_MAILTO 0.000000, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0.000000, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT 0.000000, __CRYPTO_ADDRESS_OBFU 0.000000, __CT 0.000000, __CTE 0.000000, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_DOMAIN 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_HEUR 0.000000, __DQ_NEG_IP 0.000000, __FORWARDED_MSG 0.000000, __FROM_DOMAIN_NOT_IN_BODY 0.000000, __FROM_NAME_NOT_IN_ADDR 0.000000, __FROM_NAME_NOT_IN_BODY 0.000000, __FUR_HEADER 0.000000, __HAS_FROM 0.000000, __HAS_MSGID 0.000000, __HAS_REFERENCES 0.000000, __HAS_REPLYTO 0.000000, __HEADER_ORDER_FROM 0.000000, __IN_REP_TO 0.000000, __MAIL_CHAIN 0.000000, __MIME_BOUND_CHARSET 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_P 0.000000, __MIME_TEXT_P1 0.000000, __MIME_VERSION 0.000000, __MOZILLA_USER_AGENT 0.000000, __MSGID_HEX_844412 0.000000, __NO_HTML_TAG_RAW 0.000000, __PHISH_SPEAR_SUBJ_ALERT 0.000000, __REFERENCES 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ACC 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_ADDY 0.000000, __REPLYTO_SAMEAS_FROM_DOMAIN 0.000000, __SANE_MSGID 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG2 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG_HEUR 0.000000, __SCAN_D_NEG_HEUR2 0.000000, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END 0.000000, __SUBJ_ALPHA_NEGATE 0.000000, __SUBJ_REPLY 0.000000, __TO_IN_SUBJECT 0.000000, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0.000000, __TO_NAME 0.000000, __TO_NAME_DIFF_FROM_ACC 0.000000, __TO_REAL_NAMES 0.000000, __URI_MAILTO 0.000000, __URI_NO_WWW 0.000000, __URI_NS 0.000000, __USER_AGENT 0.000000, __WEBINAR_PHRASE 0.000000 X-SASI-Probability: 10% X-SASI-RCODE: 200 X-SASI-Version: Antispam-Engine: 5.1.4, AntispamData: 2023.12.3.190615 Received: from [192.168.10.199] (dtp [192.168.10.199]) by srv2 (Weasel v2.849) for ; Sun, 03 Dec 2023 20:51:32 Reply-To: ml@ecomstation.it Subject: Re: [eCS-ISP] clamscan issue To: eCS ISP Mailing List References: Organization: eComStation dot it Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2023 20:51:21 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; it-IT; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060424 Thunderbird/1.0.8 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Language: it-IT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Il 03/12/2023 19:49, Massimo S. ha scritto: > Il 03/12/2023 19:12, Steven Levine ha scritto: >> In , on 12/03/23 >>     at 06:54 PM, "Massimo S." said: >> >> Hi Massimo, >> >>> i forgot to say, this on server1/mta1 >>> on server2 i've no issues at all >> >>> always on server1 it have difficulties to access a maildomain dir and it >>> say there zero files and zero dirs inside, this is of course no true >> >> What's the difference between the servers?  Is it just that server1 has >> more domains and files that clamscan needs to process? >> >> Steven > > > there are a lot of differences > server1 is still on bare metal, srv2 is vbox vm > both have 2GB of ram > but server1 runs a lot of stuff > > about 202 threads for the 1st and about 132 threads for the 2nd > both runs on SSD storage > > but srv1 it has an "higher" load a lot of mail users > and a lot of emails > > massimo i add this experience if i reboot the server (mta1) and after i run clamscan it allways complete with no freezes it seems that the more is the uptime of the server the higher is the chance for clamscan to freeze it memory fragmentation? massimo