Lamar Owen wrote:
Anyway, Syslog is not an option for us. We need flat files.
Ok, riddle me this:
If I have PostgreSQL set to log to syslog facility LOCAL0, and a local0.none
on /var/log/messages and local0.* to /var/log/pgsql (assuming only one
postmaster, unfortunately) then you get a flat f
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 March 2004 12:31, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > > This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5
> > > options:
> > >
> > > . the apache program - see below
> > > pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no ef
On Wednesday 24 March 2004 12:31, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5
> > options:
> >
> > . the apache program - see below
> > pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import
> > con: possible
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5
> options:
>
> . the apache program - see below
> pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import
> con: possible license issues, limited features
> . Peter Eisentraut's prog
scott.marlowe wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
. Peter Eisentraut's program
pro: portable, better featured, no license issues
con: code state uncertain, less well tested
Where is Peter's code available, I'd like to try it out.
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> . Peter Eisentraut's program
> pro: portable, better featured, no license issues
> con: code state uncertain, less well tested
Where is Peter's code available, I'd like to try it out.
---(end of broadcast)-
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 09:55:34AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5
> options:
>
> . the apache program - see below
> pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import
> con: possible license issues, limited fe
This thread seems to have died without a conclusion. AFAICS, we have 5
options:
. the apache program - see below
pro: robust, portable, extremely well tested, no effort to import
con: possible license issues, limited features
. Peter Eisentraut's program
pro: portable, better featured, no li
On Sunday 14 March 2004 1:00 pm, Tom Lane wrote:
...
> So it seems fairly likely that the fsync-by-default business is
> indeed a Linux-ism not shared by other Unixen.
Excerpt from the Postfix 2.0.8 README_FILES/LINUX_README file in case
it proves interesting:
-
LINUX syslogd uses
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:45:35AM -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
Not that I'm volunteering, but I think the biggest issue is many users
simply don't know how to approach the problem. Some docs on using
syslog, cron, etc. with PostgreSQL to accomplish maintenace jobs would
probabl
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:45:35AM -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
> Not that I'm volunteering, but I think the biggest issue is many users
> simply don't know how to approach the problem. Some docs on using
> syslog, cron, etc. with PostgreSQL to accomplish maintenace jobs would
> probably be enough.
Th
Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Manfred Spraul wrote:
> >
> >>Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Which basically shows one fsync, no O_SYNC's, and setting of the flag
> >>>only for klog reads.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Which sysklogd do you look at? The version from RedHat 9 contain
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Manfred Spraul wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Which basically shows one fsync, no O_SYNC's, and setting of the flag
only for klog reads.
Which sysklogd do you look at? The version from RedHat 9 contains this
block:
I looked on NetBSD, FreeBSD, and BSD/OS.
Bruce, I've asked
Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >Which basically shows one fsync, no O_SYNC's, and setting of the flag
> >only for klog reads.
> >
> >
>
> Which sysklogd do you look at? The version from RedHat 9 contains this
> block:
I looked on NetBSD, FreeBSD, and BSD/OS.
--
Bruce Mom
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Which basically shows one fsync, no O_SYNC's, and setting of the flag
only for klog reads.
Which sysklogd do you look at? The version from RedHat 9 contains this
block:
/*
* Crack a configuration file line
*/
void cfline(line, f)
char *line;
register str
Fernando Nasser wrote:
Lamar Owen wrote:
I am not opposed to including a small logrotator for stderr logging.
I just think it is redundant when a good highly configurable logging
facility already exists. But, if Red Hat wants to pay Tom to do
it... :-)
Maybe it is a question of prefere
I wrote:
>> strace'ing syslogd on my HPUX box shows that it doesn't issue explicit
>> fsync calls either, but I don't know of any way to tell whether it's got
>> the log files opened O_SYNC.
It occurred to me to SIGHUP syslogd and watch it reopen its log files
with strace. No O_SYNC.
So it seems
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I wonder if this fsync for PostgreSQL messages is some change made to
> > Linux syslog.
>
> You're missing the point: by default syslog fsyncs *all* messages.
> You can turn this off on a per-output-file basis by putting "-" on the
>
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I wonder if this fsync for PostgreSQL messages is some change made to
> Linux syslog.
You're missing the point: by default syslog fsyncs *all* messages.
You can turn this off on a per-output-file basis by putting "-" on the
desired lines of the syslog co
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What versions of syslog fsync, and where is the syslog.conf option. I
> > don't see it on FreeBSD or Linux.
>
> It's a per-output-file option. My Linux manpage for syslogd quoth
>
> The - may only be used to prefix a filename
My $0.02 worth: syslog-ng
:)
Regards,
John
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 5:50 AM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: Fernando Nasser; Lamar Owen; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Log rotation
Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What versions of syslog fsync, and where is the syslog.conf option. I
> don't see it on FreeBSD or Linux.
It's a per-output-file option. My Linux manpage for syslogd quoth
The - may only be used to prefix a filename if you want to omit
sync
Tom Lane wrote:
> Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Lamar Owen wrote:
> >> Third, it seems that you don't have enough profiling data to support
> >> a 'syslog is bad' position.
>
> > That is true. It is from hearsay, from people who run production
> > environments. It may be a bel
On Sunday 14 March 2004 12:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Lamar Owen wrote:
> >> Third, it seems that you don't have enough profiling data to support
> >> a 'syslog is bad' position.
> >
> > That is true. It is from hearsay, from people who run production
> >
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
>> Third, it seems that you don't have enough profiling data to support
>> a 'syslog is bad' position.
> That is true. It is from hearsay, from people who run production
> environments. It may be a belief based on old experiences t
Lamar Owen wrote:
On Saturday 13 March 2004 01:00 pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
There are some applicatons which run in servers with very strict
response times and any syscall, network packet that can be saved counts.
Ok, what about pipe overhead? If we're gong to split hairs, let's split all
of
Lamar Owen wrote:
On Saturday 13 March 2004 10:36 am, Fernando Nasser wrote:
The problem is that sysloging has more overhead than a plain append to a
file. There are some very strict response time AppServer applications
where we want to keep this things out of the picture.
Well, I have a couple
Tom Lane wrote:
> I did take a look at the Apache rotator program, and found that it
> was probably more trouble to adopt than it's worth. It seemed to
> depend on a lot of configuration and library-routine infrastructure
> that we don't share.
Here's a log rotation program that does not share th
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Did anything ever come from this thread?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-05/msg00603.php
(Heading: "Plan B for log rotation support: borrow Apache code")
Only an entry on my depressingly long personal to-do li
On Saturday 13 March 2004 01:00 pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> There are some applicatons which run in servers with very strict
> response times and any syscall, network packet that can be saved counts.
Ok, what about pipe overhead? If we're gong to split hairs, let's split all
of them. The desig
On Saturday 13 March 2004 10:36 am, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> The problem is that sysloging has more overhead than a plain append to a
> file. There are some very strict response time AppServer applications
> where we want to keep this things out of the picture.
Well, I have a couple of ideas on t
Patrick Welche wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:36:23AM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
Lamar Owen wrote:
Ok, riddle me this:
If I have PostgreSQL set to log to syslog facility LOCAL0, and a
local0.none on /var/log/messages and local0.* to /var/log/pgsql (assuming
only one postmaster, unfortuna
On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 10:36:23AM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> >Ok, riddle me this:
> >
> >If I have PostgreSQL set to log to syslog facility LOCAL0, and a
> >local0.none on /var/log/messages and local0.* to /var/log/pgsql (assuming
> >only one postmaster, unfortunately) t
Rod Taylor wrote:
I can see that in a multipostmaster setting how you might want some
differentiation between postmasters, but ISTM that the tool reading these
logs should be trained in how to separate loglines out.
Different postmasters = different conf files. Just set your syslog_facility
and/o
Robert Treat wrote:
Different postmasters = different conf files. Just set your syslog_facility
and/or your syslog_ident differently and it should be pretty easy to seperate
the logs. Actually, now that I have started using syslog fairly regularly, I
find it hard to believe it would be worth th
> > I can see that in a multipostmaster setting how you might want some
> > differentiation between postmasters, but ISTM that the tool reading these
> > logs should be trained in how to separate loglines out.
>
> Different postmasters = different conf files. Just set your syslog_facility
> and/
Lamar Owen wrote:
Anyway, Syslog is not an option for us. We need flat files.
Ok, riddle me this:
If I have PostgreSQL set to log to syslog facility LOCAL0, and a local0.none
on /var/log/messages and local0.* to /var/log/pgsql (assuming only one
postmaster, unfortunately) then you get a flat
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 15:19:29 -0500,
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I can see their problem with making a dependency to all of apache or
including
multilog in their distribution. But they probably could include something
that is only
On Saturday 13 March 2004 09:36, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Friday 12 March 2004 03:21 pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > Lamar Owen wrote:
> > > Uh, we have many many many different ways to use syslog. So my other
> > > message on the topic.
> >
> > Which other message?
>
> The one I didn't post. :-)
>
>
On Friday 12 March 2004 03:21 pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Lamar Owen wrote:
> > Uh, we have many many many different ways to use syslog. So my other
> > message on the topic.
> Which other message?
The one I didn't post. :-)
> Anyway, Syslog is not an option for us. We need flat files.
Ok, r
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Did anything ever come from this thread?
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-05/msg00603.php
> (Heading: "Plan B for log rotation support: borrow Apache code")
Only an entry on my depressingly long personal to-do list :-(
I did take a
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 15:19:29 -0500,
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> >
> >I can see their problem with making a dependency to all of apache or
> >including
> >multilog in their distribution. But they probably could include something
> >that is only a logg
Hi Lamar,
Lamar Owen wrote:
On Friday 12 March 2004 09:24 am, Fernando Nasser wrote:
I don't really care on how its done, but IMO an enterprise class
database must be able to do log rotation. Logging to Syslog is not an
option (specially with our verbosity) -- users must be able to use flat
file
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I can see their problem with making a dependency to all of apache or including
multilog in their distribution. But they probably could include something
that is only a logger either using some project that is only a logger or
splitting out the logger that is bundled with apac
On Friday 12 March 2004 09:24 am, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> I don't really care on how its done, but IMO an enterprise class
> database must be able to do log rotation. Logging to Syslog is not an
> option (specially with our verbosity) -- users must be able to use flat
> files for logging.
Uh, we
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 13:17:50 -0500,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Are you suggesting the that postgres project develop their own logger
> > rather than people just using one that has already been developed
> > by some other group?
>
> T
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are you suggesting the that postgres project develop their own logger
> rather than people just using one that has already been developed
> by some other group?
The problem from the point of view of Red Hat is to not introduce a
dependency from the Pos
On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 09:24:28 -0500,
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't really care on how its done, but IMO an enterprise class
> database must be able to do log rotation. Logging to Syslog is not an
> option (specially with our verbosity) -- users must be able to use
Tom Lane wrote:
Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Please remind me again why the postmaster cannot close and open the log
file when it receives a SIGHUP (to re-read configuration)?
(a) Because it never opened it in the first place --- the log file is
whatever was passed as stderr.
(b)
Hi,
Please remind me again why the postmaster cannot close and open the log
file when it receives a SIGHUP (to re-read configuration)? This was
discussed before but I cannot remember if and why this was not possible
or if the arguments are still valid after -l was added.
If this was possible
Seems posting to this list from the office didn't work...
The patch is attached as requested - this is just a quick hack, written to
do what I needed at the time.. consider it just as a starting point for
further work.
I've tested it on Solaris 9 with Sun's compiler (Sun Studio 8 Compilers)
but u
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
What's the best way to do log rolling with pg_autovacuum? It doesn't
seem to have any syslog options, etc. Using 'tee' maybe?
I got an email from Mark Hollow saying that he had implemented a syslog
patch for pg_autovacuum. Don't know how good it is, but it mig
Hi,
What's the best way to do log rolling with pg_autovacuum? It doesn't
seem to have any syslog options, etc. Using 'tee' maybe?
Chris
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-
Hi Peter,
> I've been playing with a little program I wrote whose sole purpose is to
> write its stdin to a file and close and reopen that file when it receives
> a signal. I figured this could work well when integrated transparently
> into pg_ctl.
>
> So, is log rotation a concern? Is this a
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
> Yeah, I use FreeBSD's wonderful newsyslog utility, and I do my logging like
> this:
>
> su -l pgsql -c '[ -d ${PGDATA} ] && exec /usr/local/bin/pg_ctl
> start -s -w -o "-i" -l /var/log/pgsql.log'
>
> And my /etc/newsyslog.conf entry:
>
> /var/log/pgsql.log p
600 3 4096 * Z
Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter Eisentraut
> Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2001 6:04 PM
> To: Christopher Kings-Lynne
> Cc: PostgreSQL Development
> Subject: Re: [HACKE
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ian Lance Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "PostgreSQL Development"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 10:08 AM
Subje
At 08:54 PM 9/5/2001 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > And no, "use syslog" doesn't count.
> >
> > Why not?
>
>The standard implementations of syslog lose log entries under heavy
>load, because they rely on a daemon which reads from a named pipe with
>a l
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Aren't there log-rotation utilities out there already? (I seem to
>> recall mention that Apache has one, for instance.) Seems like this
>> is a wheel we shouldn't have to reinvent.
> I'm aware of the Apache rotatelogs utility, b
Thus spake Tom Lane
> Also, I kinda thought the long-range solution was to encourage everyone
> to migrate to syslog logging ...
>
> > And no, "use syslog" doesn't count.
>
> Why not?
Well, one "why not" might be that syslog is not a guaranteed delivery
logging system. It might be good enough
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
> What's the problem with using newsyslog or logrotate at the moment? (ie.
> use the system log rotator)
The postmaster will never close the output file, so you can rotate all you
want, the original file will never be abandoned.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PRO
Tom Lane writes:
> Aren't there log-rotation utilities out there already? (I seem to
> recall mention that Apache has one, for instance.) Seems like this
> is a wheel we shouldn't have to reinvent.
I'm aware of the Apache rotatelogs utility, but I'm not completely
satisfied with it.
1. It tr
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> And no, "use syslog" doesn't count.
>>
>> Why not?
> The standard implementations of syslog lose log entries under heavy
> load,
Okay, that's a sufficient answer for that point.
> (My personal preference th
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > And no, "use syslog" doesn't count.
>
> Why not?
The standard implementations of syslog lose log entries under heavy
load, because they rely on a daemon which reads from a named pipe with
a limited buffer space. This is not acceptable in a production
sy
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With all the great work put into allowing true 24/7 operation, as
> distributed we're still unable to rotate the log file. While the log file
> tends to be smaller than the database system as a whole, this is still
> going to annoy people because the
> So, is log rotation a concern? Is this a reasonable solution? Other
> ideas?
>
> (No Grand Unified Logging Solutions please. And no, "use syslog" doesn't
> count.)
What's the problem with using newsyslog or logrotate at the moment? (ie.
use the system log rotator)
Chris
-
With all the great work put into allowing true 24/7 operation, as
distributed we're still unable to rotate the log file. While the log file
tends to be smaller than the database system as a whole, this is still
going to annoy people because they can't control disk usage without taking
the server
67 matches
Mail list logo
