Dewayne, Thanks for the details. We already have such an implementation (multiple producers with one consumer) but still our s6-log instances are high. Many of our services require direct logger services. We can reduce the direct logger services by creating a funnel and using regex to separate the logs but that indeed is a risky and complicated process. I am just interested to confirm the memory usage of s6-log and s6-supervise processes.
Thanks, Arjun On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 9:11 AM Dewayne Geraghty < dewa...@heuristicsystems.com.au> wrote: > Apologies, I'd implied that we have multiple s6-supervise processes > running and their children pipe to one file which is read by one s6-log > file. > > You can achieve this outcome by using s6-rc's, where one consumer can > receive multiple inputs from producers. > > There is a special (but not unique) case where a program, such as apache > which will have explicit log files (defined in apache's config file) to > record web-page accesses and error logs, on a per server basis. Because > all the supervised apache instances can write to one error logfile, I > instructed apache to write to a pipe. Multiple supervised apache > instances using the one pipe (aka funnel), which was read by one s6-log. > This way reducing the number of (s6-log) processes. I could do the > same with the access logs and use the regex function of s6-log, but I > tend to simplicity. >
