On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:10 PM, David Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 12 Sep 2013, Erik van Dam wrote: > > David Lang >>> >>> Hi David, >> >> Thanks for your reply. No i'm not sure about the syslog server itself, i >> can only talk about the clients, but i will monitor the syslog server on >> the next run. >> > > Rainer and I have been trying to say all along that the problem is not on > the clients, it's on the server. the server can't keep up and the clients > are bocked waiting for the server to write the messages. > > I would phrase it subtly different. The bottleneck is on the server, I am 99.5% sure here. However, depending on what actually this bottleneck is, we can see if/how it can be removed. In the unlikely case it cannot removed, we need to change the clients so that they either provide larger buffers and/or discard messages if they can't offload them (just as UDP does).
But... that's really really unrealistic. Just wanted to add the info, especially as people may find this years later via a search engine ;) Rainer > David Lang > > ______________________________**_________________ > rsyslog mailing list > http://lists.adiscon.net/**mailman/listinfo/rsyslog<http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog> > http://www.rsyslog.com/**professional-services/<http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/> > What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards > NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad > of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you > DON'T LIKE THAT. > _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com/professional-services/ What's up with rsyslog? Follow https://twitter.com/rgerhards NOTE WELL: This is a PUBLIC mailing list, posts are ARCHIVED by a myriad of sites beyond our control. PLEASE UNSUBSCRIBE and DO NOT POST if you DON'T LIKE THAT.
