Sorry, my fault. You said this: "Failover is available - that is done like you described in your last post.", and my post you referred to talked about the engineering stuff.
Anyway, the second link I posted describes the failover functionality, but not any specifics how the local buffer is used. Back to my configuration which I posted earlier in the thread: **.* @@server1**.example.com:200* <http://client1.example.com:200/>* $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended on & /var/log/localbuffer $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended off* It is my understanding that messages that doesn't reach the server1 machine will be store in the /var/log/localbuffer file. Can you point me to documentation that explains that happens next with these messages? On 2/5/09, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> wrote: > As I said: the second link you posted is failover and it is a supported > in v2. So failover *is* available in v2. Queuing is not. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Holter > > Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 9:58 AM > > To: rsyslog-users > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Configuring rsyslog failover > > > > Are you referring to the "smart (over-)engineering" way of doing this? > > In > > other words, there are no built in support for failover/spooling/etc > in > > rsyslog version 2? > > > > On 2/4/09, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Failover is available - that is done like you described in your last > > > post. But you need to keep an eye on the subtleties, outlined in the > > > response I've written just 2 minutes ago ;). > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Holter > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:03 PM > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Configuring rsyslog failover > > > > > > > > It seems like RHN is way behind on adding rsyslog updates to the > > repo, > > > > so it > > > > seems like I'm more or less stuck with version 2 for now. Are > there > > > any > > > > failover/spooling/etc functionality in version 2? I'd like to > > increase > > > > the > > > > chance of syslog messages reaching the syslog server, even if it > > gets > > > > offline for a short while. I'm sure it's possible to acheive this > > by > > > > smart > > > > (over-)engineering while waiting for rsyslog v3 being released on > > RHN, > > > > but > > > > I'm all for simplicity. :) > > > > > > > > On 2/4/09, Kenneth Holter <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No prob. :) > > > > > > > > > > Then I'm even more puzzled...I've configured my rsyslog client > > with > > > > this > > > > > setup: > > > > > ** > > > > > > > > > > **.* @@client1.example.com:200 > > > > > $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended on > > > > > & /var/log/localbuffer > > > > > $ActionExecOnlyWhenPreviousIsSuspended off* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I cut the link to the syslog-server (using iptables to > emulate > > > the > > > > > logserver being down), run "logger hello" on the client, and > then > > > > after a > > > > > while attach the link (by flushing the iptable rules), I see > that > > > the > > > > hello > > > > > message pops up on the rsyslog server. So some kind of spooling > > or > > > > something > > > > > seems to be active. Strange. Maybe the spooling or whatever is > > done > > > > on TCP > > > > > level or something. Maybe the rsyslog version from RHN differs > > from > > > > the > > > > > "normal" versioning? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/4/09, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Oops... and I just noticed you use v2. Spooling is not > > available > > > in > > > > v2. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for not spotting it in the first place... > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rainer Gerhards > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 10:56 AM > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Configuring rsyslog failover > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Holter > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 10:13 AM > > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Configuring rsyslog failover > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the quick reply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're right, it's not a failover solution by definition. > I > > > see > > > > now > > > > > > > > that I > > > > > > > > should have outlined my needs... What I'm aiming at, at > > least > > > > for > > > > > > > now, > > > > > > > > is a > > > > > > > > semi-failover solution: If the syslog server (i.e. > loghost) > > > > goes > > > > > > > down, > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > clients should simply spool the messages until the server > > gets > > > > back > > > > > > > > online. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Back to the examples I linked to: They both seem to > provide > > > the > > > > > > > > functionality I'm looking for. Is that correct? If so: > > what's > > > > the > > > > > > > > difference > > > > > > > > between them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No! ;) As I said, #2 is a failover scenario - it does not > > spool > > > > but > > > > > > > rather send the messags to another (failover) server if the > > > > primary > > > > > > > fails. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/4/09, Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Kenneth, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the first link does NOT describe a failover case. In the > > > > first > > > > > > > link, > > > > > > > > > data is queued while the syslogd is not available. A > > > failover > > > > case > > > > > > > > > (described in link two) is that if one syslogd goes > down, > > > > data is > > > > > > > > sent > > > > > > > > > to another. This is not done in case 1: there, messages > > are > > > > queued > > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > the syslogd is down and sent to *the same syslogd* when > > it > > > is > > > > up > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > So no second syslogd involved in case 1, so this is no > > > > failover > > > > > > > > > scenario. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > HTH > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Holter > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 9:59 AM > > > > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [rsyslog] Configuring rsyslog failover > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We're running rsyslog 2.0.6 downloaded from RHN, and > > are > > > > about > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > set > > > > > > > > > > up > > > > > > > > > > reliability/failover. I've found two setup tutorials > > for > > > > this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com/doc-rsyslog_reliable_forwarding.html > > > > > > > > > > 2. > > > > http://wiki.rsyslog.com/index.php/FailoverSyslogServer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems like both setups configure reliable transfer, > > but > > > > using > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > completely different syntax. Is it so that the former > > one > > > > is the > > > > > > > > > syntax > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > newer versions of rsyslog? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Kenneth Holter > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > rsyslog mailing list > > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > > http://www.rsyslog.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rsyslog mailing list > > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > > http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog > http://www.rsyslog.com > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
