On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > I think the main point of the OP was that he logs to a NAS device, so I do > not see way to write to it without going through a network share.
ahh, have we been assuming that this is NFS when all he said was NAS? if so, please clarify what protocol you are using to talk to the NAS. it could make a huge difference here. David Lang > Other than that, I agree to your statement. > > Rainer > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Alan T DeKok >> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 8:40 AM >> To: rsyslog-users >> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Enabling >> $ActionFileEnableSynccausedmassiveincreaseinwrite volume (bytes/sec) to >> NAS -cansomeone helpshed light? >> >> Rainer Gerhards wrote: >>> So my conclusion really is that you need to look at the NFS layer. >> >> Logs should NEVER be written to an NFS mount. >> >> David gave a good explanation as to why. But the above prohibition >> should be made clear in the docs, if it isn't already. >> >> If the NFS server goes away, then the write transaction rate will go >> to zero. This likely isn't what people want from a syslog server. >> >> There is already a way to get syslog data from one system to another: >> the syslog protocol. Using NFS as a replacement for syslog is wrong on >> many levels. >> >> Alan DeKok. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
