Integralis Web/MIME Sweeper.
Aaron Everingham
>> >> Has anuone looked at Web/MIME Sweeper from Integralis?
>> Yeah, we aell the thing here in Australia. It is a pretty good product
-
>> lots of caoabilities, not too hard to manage and very sophisticated in
what
>> it can do. For fine grain control over content, I have yet to see
anything
SNIP
>Aaron,
>Can you make any comments as to the performance of the product? I have
>heard that it's great for low volume sites (say, a couple of 100 emails
>per day) but it's not too flash with high volume (say, a couple of
>thousand emails per day). I realise that number of emails is not a valid
>measure (ie. scanning 10 emails with no attachments vs. 10 emails with a
>2Mb attachment each is not a valid comparison) however, you've got to
>start measuring somewhere.
We have a number of sites running large volumes and quantities of email
through MIMEsweeper. Like many apps, chuck some extra CPU and rAM at it and
it performs faster. Our standard install is something like this:
For upto 500 users:
Pentium 166/200, 64 Mbs RAM, 4 Gb HDD. This work perfectly well and we
have had no problems regarding performance.
500 - 2000 Users - Pentium 200/230, 128Mbs Ram, 4 - 6 Gb HDD
2000 + Users - Pentium 200/233 Dual processor, 128 Mbs RAM (or more) 8 Gb
HDD
We also use FastWideSCSI HDD to sped eerything up and a good controller.
hope this is of help
Gasparini, Edy
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCA88E.9B99C6A0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Wednesday, 13 August 1997 9:48, Aaron
Everingham[SMTP:aa...@citadel.com.au] wrote:
> >> Has anuone looked at Web/MIME Sweeper from Integralis?
>
>
> Yeah, we aell the thing here in Australia. It is a pretty good
product -
> lots of caoabilities, not too hard to manage and very sophisticated
in what
> it can do. For fine grain control over content, I have yet to see
anything
> better.
>
> It runs on a pretty basic NT server and has good reporting tools
and
> archiving capabilities. You can run multiple virus scanners
concureently,
> it does recurseive scanning for viruses but the thing our customers
really
> like it for is the lexical scanning capabilities.
>
Aaron,
Can you make any comments as to the performance of the product? I have
heard that it's great for low volume sites (say, a couple of 100
emails per day) but it's not too flash with high volume (say, a couple
of thousand emails per day). I realise that number of emails is not a
valid measure (ie. scanning 10 emails with no attachments vs. 10
emails with a 2Mb attachment each is not a valid comparison) however,
you've got to start measuring somewhere.
I'd also be interested in your thoughts re: the sizing of an NT box
for various size solutions.
./edy gasparini (...the thing I miss most is my mind).
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCA88E.9B99C6A0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
<encoded_portion_removed>
bT4AAGMi
------ =_NextPart_000_01BCA88E.9B99C6A0--