> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > OK, that makes sense. My only question is how many platforms _don't_
> > have syslog. If it is only NT and QNX, I think we can live with using
> > it by default if it exists.
>
> There seems to be a certain amount of confusion here. The proposal
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, that makes sense. My only question is how many platforms _don't_
> have syslog. If it is only NT and QNX, I think we can live with using
> it by default if it exists.
There seems to be a certain amount of confusion here. The proposal at
hand was
On Sep 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] contorted a few electrons to say...
Bruce> OK, that makes sense. My only question is how many platforms _don't_
Bruce> have syslog. If it is only NT and QNX, I think we can live with using
Bruce> it by default if it exists.
perhaps you could take some code from
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>
> > Why are you so worrying about finding syslog() in configure? We have
> > already done lots of function testings. Is there anything special with
> > syslog()?
>
> All the other functions we test for come with a replacement plan. Either
> we choose between several sim
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> Why are you so worrying about finding syslog() in configure? We have
> already done lots of function testings. Is there anything special with
> syslog()?
All the other functions we test for come with a replacement plan. Either
we choose between several similar alternative
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>
> > There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
> > consensus? I think this is a good one.
>
> It would be a good one if we make the blind assumption that syslog()
> exists on all platforms. That is possible, but not guaranteed. (BeOS,
> QNX,
On Tuesday 11 September 2001 06:14 pm, Martín Marqués wrote:
> There was a discusion about log rotation last week, so, where are we going?
> Pipe the output of postmaster to a log rotator like apaches logrotate, or
> are we going to use syslog and have the syslog log rotator do the rotation?
Both
On Mar 11 Sep 2001 02:07, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
> > consensus? I think this is a good one.
>
> Yes, I thought we decided it should be the default too.
There was a discusion about log rotation last week, so, where are we goin
> I know it can have an adverse effect on a mail server, is syslog going
> to give us any performance hits?
Yes. On some platforms (HP-UX at least) applications can stall ~2s
retrying if syslogd is not reading the messages written to its pipe.
syslogd also has a reputation for using too much C
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
> consensus? I think this is a good one.
It would be a good one if we make the blind assumption that syslog()
exists on all platforms. That is possible, but not guaranteed. (BeOS,
QNX, Cygwin?)
The al
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
> > consensus? I think this is a good one.
>
> Yes, I thought we decided it should be the default too.
I know it can have an adverse effect on a mail server, is syslog going
to giv
> There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
> consensus? I think this is a good one.
Yes, I thought we decided it should be the default too.
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 853-3000
+
There was a discussion about --enable-syslog by default. What was the
consensus? I think this is a good one.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
13 matches
Mail list logo
