Re: [logs] Apache Logs

From: Karl Vogel (vogelkeat_private)
Date: Wed Jan 30 2002 - 10:36:48 PST

Next message: rich: "Re: [logs] Re: syslogd / some analysis"

Previous message: Nathan Bates: "[logs] a promiscuous syslog daemon"
In reply to: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [logs] Apache Logs"
Next in thread: Bill Burge: "Re: [logs] Apache Logs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:54:46 -0500, 
>> "Marcus J. Ranum" <mjrat_private> said:

M> I guess I've heard a lot of people talk about syslog bogging down under
M> load but I've never seen any measures behind the claim; can anyone
M> provide some hard information? I don't feel like writing a syslogd
M> torture test - has anyone? Are we operating on hearsay?

   The qmail archives (http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail)
   have lots of comments about syslog buckling under the strain of
   large-scale mailing list activity, but no measurements that I could find
   after a brief search.

-- 
Karl Vogel               ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433
vogelkeat_private                   http://www.dnaco.net/~vogelke

Lisa:   Dad, I think that's pretty spurious.
Homer:  Well, thank you, honey.
                --Homer Simpson, "Homer Vs. Lisa And The 8th Commandment"

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: loganalysis-unsubscribeat_private
For additional commands, e-mail: loganalysis-helpat_private

Next message: rich: "Re: [logs] Re: syslogd / some analysis"
Previous message: Nathan Bates: "[logs] a promiscuous syslog daemon"
In reply to: Marcus J. Ranum: "Re: [logs] Apache Logs"
Next in thread: Bill Burge: "Re: [logs] Apache Logs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jan 30 2002 - 11:19:00 PST