> I am not sure on the exact semantics of the 4.6.4 engine, but in any > case you > need to limit concurrency (and thus speed) as much as possible. If you > really > need sequence, that means you need to run it on a single thread (with > a > direct mode main queue). The defaults look like they "preserve > sequence", and > you will see the inevitable out of sequence only when heavy traffic > occurs. > > However, any approach to trying to "preserve sequence" will not work > if > looked at closely enough, so there is nothing that can be preseverd. > Details > are in my Linux Kongress paper: > > http://blog.gerhards.net/2010/10/linux-kongress-2010-rsyslog-paper.html >
Thanks Rainer. Interesting. I read chapter 7 about concurrency optimization. What I am looking for is indeed what is described there: preserved timestamp order. And this only with some restrictions: * in time windows within few seconds or so because those message will be processed with the need of chronological order. * only per system Of course there might be corner cases where this will not always work but this will then be only due to a system outage or something like that. I am now going to try 5.6.0 with omruleset. I hope it will work then. Are there any config options to control or affect timestamp ordering? In my case I guess it would be sufficient if only one thread would feed the database. TIA -Marc _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
