On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Rainer Gerhards wrote: >>> On the other hand, it may not be a bad solution to have two config >>> files, one for plugins to be loaded and one for the actual config. >> That >>> would probably substantially reduce the complexity of a config-reload >>> HUP (under the assumption that changes to plugins require a full >>> restart). >> >> that's a good point, although I'm not sure that it will work in all >> cases. >> >> changing modules requires a full restart >> >> but what about changing what port you are listening on? (especially if >> you >> are dropping privilates for security reasons) > > Dropping privileges is a different beast. If you do that, there are many > things that cannot be changed on the fly. This applies to listening ports, > but potentially to almost everything, as required support files may no longer > be accessible. So dropping privs and, at the same time, dynamically reloading > configs is a dangerous game. Whoever wants to play this needs to know exactly > what he does. I do not intend to care about all those cases ;) > > Other than that, a main issue with dynamic config reload is that a change in > loaded modules can be rather complex. If they are fixed, complexity is > reduced. Still, there is lots of work to do to make this happen, but it > becomes at least a bit less problematic.
two files definantly makes it clear what can be modified on the fly and what can't. David Lang _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
