On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 08:48:37AM -0400, Paul Chvostek wrote:
>
> I've been looking at Apache's mod_log_mysql and mod_mylo, and if I don't
> need the extended featureset offered by mod_log_mysql, I can't help but
> wonder if I'd get any better performance than with something like:
>
> LogFormat "INSERT INTO httpdlog (vhost,host,logname,...) ('%v','%h','%l',...);"
> mysqlfmt
> CustomLog "|/usr/local/bin/mysql -uuser -ppass logdb" mysqlfmt
>
> Aside from the potential security issue of having a MySQL password
> visible to a 'ps' command, what's the disadvantage of simply piping
> INSERT statements directly into the text client?
>
> Presumably a CustomLog entry like this would constitute a single,
> persistent database connection, which would terminate when Apache went
> away and be restarted when Apache was re-run?
>
> Any thoughts?
Off the top of my head... If MySQL goes down, you lose records. With
mod_log_sql, they get queued up so that you can insert them later.
With mod_log_sql, you don't have a bunch of little 'mysql' proceses
sitting around.
Jeremy
--
Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo!
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/
MySQL 4.0.13: up 31 days, processed 976,186,259 queries (358/sec. avg)
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
