Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Log rotation?

From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian(at)airs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Log rotation?
Date: 2001-09-06 03:54:44
Message-ID: si4rqhvurf.fsf@daffy.airs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> 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
system, since heavy load is often just the time you need to see the
log entries.

It would be possible to implement the syslog(3) interface in a
different way, of course, which did not use syslogd.  I don't know of
any such implementation.

(My personal preference these days is an approach like DJB's
daemontools, which separates the handling of log entries from the
program doing the logging.)

Ian

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-09-06 04:04:14
Subject: Re: Log rotation?
Previous:From: Doug McNaughtDate: 2001-09-06 03:28:10
Subject: Re: Is there a problem running vacuum in the middle of a transaction?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group