RE: syslog [7:43939]
Steven, I think it must be due to the fact that a buffer is just memory but other output locations would require additional I/O calls. Rah -Original Message- From: Steven A. Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 May 2002 16:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: syslog [7:43939] If I debug something on a router, the messages must be generated no matter what, so why is it less taxing on a router to send them to an internal buffer instead of a console port? -- RFC 1149 Compliant. Get in my head: http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43943t=43939 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: syslog [7:43939]
The console port is a serial device which uses interrupts. Every time an interrupt is generated, the router CPU has to stop what it's doing to see what's going on. The internal buffer doesn't have that overhead to deal with. That's my understanding, at least. Ken Steven A. Ridder 05/11/02 10:18AM If I debug something on a router, the messages must be generated no matter what, so why is it less taxing on a router to send them to an internal buffer instead of a console port? -- RFC 1149 Compliant. Get in my head: http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=43946t=43939 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
