On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:14 PM, David Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > by the way, the following command line may help you see what's happeing > (with relative stats) > > grep imudp pstats |grep -v "=0" > > grep imudp pstats |grep -v "=0" > > Also, when we are writing out to /dev/null, let's make a run with ziplevel > and asyncwrite removed (since they only benefit us by saving I/O and moving > it to a different thread) > > and most probably also caused the contention you saw... :-)
> > David Lang > > On Thu, 10 Oct 2013, Robert wrote: > > Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 09:46:38 -0400 >> From: Robert <[email protected]> >> To: Rainer Gerhards <[email protected]> >> Cc: David Lang <[email protected]>, rsyslog-users <[email protected] >> >, >> rmkml <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Tr : Re: perfomance tweaking (fwd) >> >> These are the results with 1000 for both timeREquery and batchsize, >> writing out to /dev/null >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Rainer Gerhards >> Sent: 10/10/13 08:48 AM >> To: Robert >> Subject: Re: [rsyslog] Tr : Re: perfomance tweaking (fwd) >> >> umm.. again the ML thread is broken :-( >> >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Robert < [email protected] > wrote:From >> the documentation does that mean that I should lessen my timeRequery and >> batchSize? to something lower ? >> >> A relatively large batch size is a good thing. I would be conservative >> with timeRequery in a large batch environment. As I wrote in the doc, I'd >> recommend not to go higer than 10. >> >> Rainer >> >> Robert. >> >> >> >> >> >> Robert. >> > _______________________________________________ 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.
