On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Pavel Kankovsky writes:
> > The question is: do you prefer to LOSE old messages or new messages when
> > you run out of space? Syslog says "new messages", cyclog says "old
> > messages". I have to admit I do not understand why some people think one
> > of the strategies is inherently better than the other...explanation?
>
> Even if you're running syslog on its own filesystem (I don't have a
> spare filesystem to run syslog on), one logging system will cause
> all logging systems to discard their messages. You'd need to run
> each logging system on its own filesystem.
Ever heard of disk quotas? It might be a bit of overkill to create a
special user for every logfile (or group of thereof) but it works.
(BTW: Once upon a time, DJB refused to explicitly limit qmail's usage of
resources ("qmail-dos-[12]") because the OS could do it itself (rlimits).
Replace rlimits with quotas and follow the implication... <g>)
--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak [ Boycott Microsoft--http://www.vcnet.com/bms ]
"Resistance is futile. Open your source code and prepare for assimilation."
