thanks for info matt, was planning to use this on some other project in mind ( might pick your brain on that later ;) )
separating it out the compression to external process isn’t necessarily a bad idea, but having non-reliable scripts is. As it so happened many times before. I’d rather depend on my app than an external process. which is why I was looking for an “agent” . thanks! chandra On 16 Nov 2017, 9:57 PM +0530, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>, wrote: > I brought up Snappy only because I used their off-heap API recently. Snappy > is more about real time compression rather than size (I think snappy files > tend to be larger than gzip files, but take less resources to compress and > decompress). The idea here is to offer support via libraries using native > implementations that can work with direct byte buffers, mmap'd files, or > even just a file name. > > With that in mind, is it so bad to offer the ability to execute an external > process to compress the file? > > On 16 November 2017 at 09:59, Chandra <[email protected] > wrote: > > > > What if compression worked off-heap > > off-heap compression sounds interesting. Let me check if I can find any. > > > > Snappy’s compression is a different altogether, I am not necessarily > > looking for a different compression formats, as I’d have add support for it > > in downstream. Standard bz2 , gzip would work in-fact. > > > > > > Ideally a reliable agent something like `FileBeat` would be great for this > > situation. :-/ > > > > Best, > > Chandra > > > > > > On 16 Nov 2017, 9:08 PM +0530, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>, wrote: > > > What if compression worked off-heap like with some of the native > > > implementations of codecs? I'm thinking of this one < > > > https://github.com/xerial/snappy-java> for example. > > > > > > On 15 November 2017 at 23:41, Chandra <chandra.tungathurthi@rwth- > > aachen.de > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Guys, > > > > > > > > I need some input on how this handle situation: > > > > > > > > we are on HP/LL setting where the incoming requests are processed and > > > > logged ( buffered, of course with “async logging”). There are some > > > > situations where due to spikes in the volume of requests, the > > compression > > > > on rolling creates memory starvation. > > > > > > > > Now, a straight forward fix would to remove it from the “context” of > > jvm > > > > and use a script to monitor and compress it timely. as low-hanging the > > > > solution may be, I am skeptical of this solution as the script _may_ > > fail > > > > leading to disk starvation(!) > > > > > > > > I am looking for an alternate and _full-proof_ solution for this > > > > situation. Any thoughts, suggestions would be useful and appreciated. > > > > > > > > thanks! > > > > Chandra > > > > > > > > On 16 Nov 2017, 10:01 AM +0530, Ralph Goers < > > [email protected]>, > > > > wrote: > > > > > Unless someone objects I plan to start the release process for Log4j > > > > 2.10 tomorrow. I had wanted to include a fix for LOG4J2-2106 but the > > > > problem only occurs in rare situations and I am not sure how to fix it > > yet. > > > > There are a lot of other issues that deserve looking at but nothing I > > can > > > > see that warrants waiting on. > > > > > > > > > > Ralph > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matt Sicker <[email protected] > > > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]
