I've been looking further into this and even on my Fedora 15 system with 2.6.38.8-35 and rsyslog 5.8.2 I'm only seeing low-res times for local services but for instance, iptables is logging with high-res times.
Do the services themselves need to support the use of hi-res timing, if that's the case then surely the usability of the hi-res timing is going to be reduced. Is it likely to impact log analyzers having a mix of hi-res and low-res times with-in the logs. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this. ----- Original Message ----- > > > Can you elaborate why? That would be very interesting to me. I > > > really > > > think > > > it is a shame that we have hi-res format since 5+ years, but > > > everybody turns > > > it off... > > > > > > > It appears that their are a limited number of clients that I'm > > seeing > > logging with hi-res so to have it enabled for only a few services > > logging in hi-res would appear pointless. > > I personally think "it depends" because you can correlate the hi-res > ones > better. But I see your point. Also let me say that with a > sufficiently recent > kernel, 5.8.3 is able to pull a hires timestamp from the system for > all local > socket messages. > > > If I could enable it in our environment and have all logging hi-res > > I > > will certainly be doing it, that's why we have been trying. > > The java application that we run WILL certainly be logging in > > hi-res > > and this will be centralized using log4j and rsyslog with the JSON > > module. > > > > Out of interest we are also monitoring the rsyslog stats using pcp > > and > > I suspect we will have some modules/details heading your way once > > we > > have completed implementation and testing. > > Let them flow :) > > Rainer > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > Ahh, I now see it. Look at the raw messages. Lines 7 and 31 > > > > > are > > > > > correctly > > > > > formatted. Lines 15 and 23 have invalid format. With invalid > > > > > format, > > > > > interpretation is not guaranteed. Looks like 5.8.0 in that > > > > > case > > > > > uses > > > > > the > > > > > timestamp of message reception. I suggest to use the current > > > > > stable, > > > > > I think > > > > > it will work somewhat different. Bottom line is that auditd > > > > > should > > > > > emit the > > > > > proper format. > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rodney McKee > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:26 AM > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] timereported:::date-rfc3339 > > > > > > > > > > > > http://pastebin.com/TzPVzknt > > > > > > The 2 line I have previously seen with hi-res times are 15 > > > > > > and > > > > > > 23 > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > > [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rodney McKee > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 8:11 AM > > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] timereported:::date-rfc3339 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The following log has a restart of auditd and a ssh > > > > > > > > connection > > > > > > > > during > > > > > > > > the debug run. > > > > > > > > http://pastebin.com/cRPuA1Z8 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! Unfortunately, the instrumentation does not > > > > > > > provide > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > I am > > > > > > > looking > > > > > > > for (maybe because of an older build, maybe it's just not > > > > > > > there...). > > > > > > > Can you > > > > > > > please also write all messages to a file with > > > > > > > RSYSLOG_DebugFormat > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > post > > > > > > > that file. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With 5.8.0, you should probably never see hires, so I am > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > bit > > > > > > > puzzled. Maybe > > > > > > > auditd does some "interesting" things to the log socket. > > > > > > > Note > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > rsyslog > > > > > > > expects syslog() API format, but older versions (like > > > > > > > 5.8.0) > > > > > > > did > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > enforce > > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rodney > > > > > > > > > > McKee > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 7:41 AM > > > > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [rsyslog] timereported:::date-rfc3339 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow, Rainer, thanks for the quick response. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So on a local system some processes actually > > > > > > > > > > provide a > > > > > > > > > > high > > > > > > > > > > res > > > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > > that rsyslog then logs as %timereported%. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As far as the local sockets is concerned, things > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > consistent. If > > > > > > > > > that's not the case, it is best if you provide a > > > > > > > > > debug > > > > > > > > > log -- > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > log > > > > > > > > > samples > > > > > > > > > just show the result but now how we arrived there :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did not realize this would be > > > > > > > > > > happening. I guess that most clients then do not > > > > > > > > > > provide > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > hi-res > > > > > > > > > > times and this might explain some messages having > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > not: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10+10:00 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.702529+10:00 The audit daemon is > > > > > > > > > > exiting. > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10.703673+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.703673+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > audit(1310963230.693:4484770): > > > > > > > > > > audit_pid=0 > > > > > > > > > > old=1773 by auid=4294967295 > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10.867738+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.867738+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > audit(1310963230.864:4484771): > > > > > > > > > > auid=672 > > > > > > > > > > op=remove rule key=(null) list=2 res=1 > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10+10:00 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.959443+10:00 Warning - freq is > > > > > > > > > > non-zero > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > incremental > > > > > > > > > > flushing not selected. > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10+10:00 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.978467+10:00 Started dispatcher: > > > > > > > > > > /sbin/audispd > > > > > > > > > > pid: > > > > > > > > > > 4794 > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10.981061+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.981061+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > audit(1310963230.979:4484772): > > > > > > > > > > audit_pid=4792 > > > > > > > > > > old=0 by auid=672 > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 14:27:10 2011-07-18T14:27:10+10:00 2011-07- > > > > > > > > > > 18T14:27:10.998047+10:00 af_unix plugin > > > > > > > > > > initialized > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:rsyslog- > > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rodney > > > > > > > > > > > > McKee > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 6:00 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > To: rsyslog-users > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [rsyslog] timereported:::date-rfc3339 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What effects the recording of milliseconds when > > > > > > > > > > > > using > > > > > > > > > > > > timereported:::date- > > > > > > > > > > > > rfc3339. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This field contains what the sender told us. If > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > sender > > > > > > > > > > > sent > > > > > > > > > > > no > > > > > > > > > > > ms, we can > > > > > > > > > > > not report them. Rather than to pretend > > > > > > > > > > > "x.000000" > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > there, we > > > > > > > > > > > do not > > > > > > > > > > > give them. Note that for the same reason there > > > > > > > > > > > may be > > > > > > > > > > > sub-ms > > > > > > > > > > > resolution, like > > > > > > > > > > > us, if that is what the sender reported. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Note that starting with the latest v5-devel > > > > > > > > > > > version > > > > > > > > > > > AND a > > > > > > > > > > > recent > > > > > > > > > > > Linux > > > > > > > > > > > kernel, we can ask the system for more precise > > > > > > > > > > > timestamps > > > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > messages > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > come in via the log socket. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rainer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some log entries get milliseconds and some do > > > > > > > > > > > > not: > > > > > > > > > > > > The template: > > > > > > > > > > > > "%TIMESTAMP% %timereported:::date-rfc3339% > > > > > > > > > > > > %timegenerated:::date- > > > > > > > > > > > > rfc3339% %msg%\n" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The output: > > > > > > > > > > > > Jul 18 13:58:30 2011-07-18T13:58:30+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > 2011-07-18T13:58:30.723250+10:00 > > > > > > > > > > > > test > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am I missing something. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rgds > > > > > > > > > > > > Rodney > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
