Re: Log rotation?
| От | Ian Lance Taylor |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Log rotation? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | si4rqhvurf.fsf@daffy.airs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Log rotation? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Log rotation?
Re: Log rotation? |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > > And no, "use syslog" doesn't count. > > Why not? The standard implementations of syslog lose log entries under heavy load, because they rely on a daemon which reads from a named pipe with a limited buffer space. This is not acceptable in a production system, since heavy load is often just the time you need to see the log entries. It would be possible to implement the syslog(3) interface in a different way, of course, which did not use syslogd. I don't know of any such implementation. (My personal preference these days is an approach like DJB's daemontools, which separates the handling of log entries from the program doing the logging.) Ian
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: