> The notifications are new, as we’ve all noticed, and probably should
not be displayed for internally defined queues which should never be
misconfigured
Yeah.
So. if I may ask, what has rsyslog put into place to deter such an
occurrence in the future?
Asked differently, when this change was made, was there a QA test in
place to detect possible issues the change may raise, e.g., spamming log
files with useless entries?
If so, why did not those tests find this issue?
If not, why not?
And asked differently, differently, did those who put this change into
place even imagine the ramification of what they check into the tree?
Something broke.
To prevent that from breaking again, the first step is to identify why
it broke.
On 6/9/2025 12:03 AM, John Chivian wrote:
rsyslog is notifying its users of a potential misconfiguration source.
The notifications are new, as we’ve all noticed, and probably should
not be displayed for internally defined queues which should never be
misconfigured.
It is because a user can cause issues with optimal queue processing on
user defined queues, by unintentionally specifying watermark values that
don’t make sense, that the warning was implemented.
It is one of the things that comes with using publicly maintained
software. The configuration warnings are just that, warnings. They do
not affect the configuration or operation of the software, and they do
not invalidate the other log entries that rsyslog might write to its own
log file.
On Jun 8, 2025, at 22:43, Mike via rsyslog <[email protected]>
wrote:
Is rsyslog intentionally foisting this issue upon its users?
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
https://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/
What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards
NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of
sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE
THAT.
