Re: Log files, how to rotate properly
От | Lamar Owen |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Log files, how to rotate properly |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 01061411161401.00942@lowen.wgcr.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Log files, how to rotate properly (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thursday 14 June 2001 10:47, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Lamar Owen writes: > > I have yet to see a 'lost' syslog message here, in over three years. > I didn't mean sylog losing messages, but some PostgreSQL messages not > getting there. Then whose fault is that? Is it our syslog calling, or the receiving syslog not hearing? (Yes, I know that by default syslog uses UDP).... > > If syslog looses messages, let's try helping fix syslog rather than > > recommending Yet Another Log Rotating Solution. > YALRS is fine by me. Why reinvent the wheel? Particularly such a generic, OS function wheel as logging? > Note that syslog requires root access, which we > don't want to require. This is a tired mantra -- most PostgreSQL installations are being run by DBA's with either direct root access or a friendly sysadmin (the proof is that the RPMset probably has more users than the regular build, and installation of the RPMset requires root on most RPM-supported OSes). Besides, _recommending_ syslog != _requiring_ syslog -- the current build system for logging isn't broken and doesn't need fixing -- but rather than recommend a non-syslog solution out of hand, an even presentation of the options is more productive. We have good syslog support -- and we have good non-syslog support. Neither are really _great_, but both work. Neither should be removed, by any means, and neither should be required, either. Which means a consistent elog() usage is to be preferred over a mix of elog() and fputs/fprintf. For those that can't get either root access or a friendly enough sysadmin, a presentation of the options available to them is good as well. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: