| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: rotatelog / logrotate with PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2002-09-25 16:45:18 |
| Message-ID: | 11273.1032972318@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> Well, I've found the syslog facility to be noticeable slower than
> rotatelogs with pgsql doing its own logging. So that's why I do it the
> rotatelogs way. Choice is good.
Other reasons: syslog is rumored to drop messages under sufficiently
heavy load (at least on some platforms); syslog inherently can't capture
all messages that might appear on stderr. For example, on most
platforms a link failure in loading a dynamic library is going to be
reported by the dynamic linker on stderr --- we have no way to reroute
it to syslog. If you're trying to debug a problem like "why doesn't
plperl work", those messages are priceless.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Johnson, Shaunn | 2002-09-25 16:46:50 | Re: dumping a pg_* table |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-25 16:37:16 | Re: dumping a pg_* table |