On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> We should also take a look at Apache's rotator to see if there's any need
> to reinvent the wheel at all. I have not seen it, am not even sure what
> it's written in...
It's written in 140 lines of C (blank lines and all), and has been very
solid in my exper
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> AFAICS, the only practical way to do this is to have a single process
>> collecting the stdout/stderr from the postmaster and all its children.
> I think not. It's a little tricky handling it directly in the child
> processes, but
Tom Lane writes:
> AFAICS, the only practical way to do this is to have a single process
> collecting the stdout/stderr from the postmaster and all its children.
I think not. It's a little tricky handling it directly in the child
processes, but it's been done before.
> If someone can offer a be
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hey, do you guys think that a setting of silent_mode = false might affect
> > no log files getting created?
>
> No, but setting it to true would be bad news.
That's what I'd meant actually. I had to turn of s
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hey, do you guys think that a setting of silent_mode = false might affect
> no log files getting created?
No, but setting it to true would be bad news.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)-
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Ed L. wrote:
> On Friday April 4 2003 2:17, scott.marlowe wrote:
> >
> > OK, So I tried putting the 2>&1 before the | and all. No matter what I
> > try, every from the | on is ignored. ps doesn't show it, and neither
> > does pg_ctl status. Both show a command line of
> > /u
On Friday April 4 2003 2:17, scott.marlowe wrote:
>
> OK, So I tried putting the 2>&1 before the | and all. No matter what I
> try, every from the | on is ignored. ps doesn't show it, and neither
> does pg_ctl status. Both show a command line of
> /usr/local/pgsql/bin/postmaster as the only inpu
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Ed L. wrote:
> On Friday April 4 2003 11:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > rotatelogs is in my path and all, it just never sees it.
> >
> > You mean the command fails? Or just that it doesn't capture output?
> >
> > > "$po_path" ${1+"$@"
"Ed L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmmm. I would have agreed 2>&1 was needed, too, but this command seems to
> routinely capture all output, including ERRORs:
> nohup pg_ctl start | nohup rotatelogs server_log.%a 86400
That's 'cause pg_ctl internally redirects the postmaster's stderr.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > rotatelogs is in my path and all, it just never sees it.
>
> You mean the command fails? Or just that it doesn't capture output?
The database starts, but rotatelogs doesn't get run. I.e. it's just like
every
On Friday April 4 2003 11:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > rotatelogs is in my path and all, it just never sees it.
>
> You mean the command fails? Or just that it doesn't capture output?
>
> > "$po_path" ${1+"$@"} > 2>&1 &
>
> Most if not all of the postmaste
"scott.marlowe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> rotatelogs is in my path and all, it just never sees it.
You mean the command fails? Or just that it doesn't capture output?
> "$po_path" ${1+"$@"} &1 &
Most if not all of the postmaster's log output goes to stderr, so you'd need
"$po_path" ${1+"$@
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Ed L. wrote:
> On Friday April 4 2003 10:19, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > I feel we really ought to have *some* rotator included in the standard
> > distro, just so that the Admin Guide can point to a concrete solution
> > instead of having to arm-wave about what you can get off the
On Friday April 4 2003 10:19, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I feel we really ought to have *some* rotator included in the standard
> distro, just so that the Admin Guide can point to a concrete solution
> instead of having to arm-wave about what you can get off the net.
> If someone can offer a better altern
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What would get me a whole lot more excited is if the server could write
> directly to a file and do its own rotating (or at least reopening of
> files).
AFAICS, the only practical way to do this is to have a single process
collecting the stdout/stderr
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 09:16:39AM -0700, scott.marlowe wrote:
> > where -r is the rotation period in seconds. If it's an external program
>
> Ours rotates based on size rather than time. I can see some
> advantages to the time-based approach, but i
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>
> > Is anyone interested in having pglog-rotator?
>
> What would get me a whole lot more excited is if the server could write
> directly to a file and do its own rotating (or at least reopening of
> files).
>From a technical point of view I
On Friday April 4 2003 10:04, Ed L. wrote:
> By way of feature ideas, one very convenient but not widely used feature
> of Apache's log rotator is the ability to specify a strftime() format
> string for the file extension. For example, if I want to have my logs
> rollover every 24 hours and be nam
On Friday April 4 2003 9:16, scott.marlowe wrote:
>
> That said, a log rotation capability built right into pg_ctl or
> thereabouts would be a very nice feature. I.e. 'pg_ctl -r 86400 -l
> $PGDATA/logs/pgsql start'
>
> where -r is the rotation period in seconds. If it's an external program
> that
On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 05:13:13PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> use of pg_ctl, it's written in Perl, and it doesn't do anything for
> Windows users, I think it's not suitable for a general audience.
It doesn't prevent the use of pg_ctl, although it does indeed prevent
the use of pg_ctl for sta
On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 09:16:39AM -0700, scott.marlowe wrote:
> where -r is the rotation period in seconds. If it's an external program
Ours rotates based on size rather than time. I can see some
advantages to the time-based approach, but if you have wide
variations in traffic, you run the ris
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>
> > Is anyone interested in having pglog-rotator?
>
> What would get me a whole lot more excited is if the server could write
> directly to a file and do its own rotating (or at least reopening of
> files).
>
> Considering
Andrew Sullivan writes:
> Is anyone interested in having pglog-rotator?
What would get me a whole lot more excited is if the server could write
directly to a file and do its own rotating (or at least reopening of
files).
Considering that your rotator is tailored to a rather specific setup, it
do
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:41:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew, could you toss up the script on pgsql-patches just so people can
> take a look? Then we could think more about where to go with it.
Ok, the first try failed (of course) because I wasn't subscribed.
Should be there now, though.
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 02:12:03PM -0500, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Does this log rotator do something that apache's doesn't?
Probably not. This was just easier for us.
A little information might be handy here: we run postgres nder a
hosted environment, and we do not have root on the relevant boxes.
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:41:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> You would not actually have to: you could just pipe pg_ctl's output to
> pglog-rotator. But I think it'd be cool if pg_ctl had an option to use
> pglog-rotator, or maybe even adopt it as standard behavior.
It's currently built to call a
Does this log rotator do something that apache's doesn't?
Dave
On Thu, 2003-04-03 at 13:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim Buttafuoco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Would the plan be to add it to pg_ctl?
>
> You would not actually have to: you could just pipe pg_ctl's output to
> pglog-rotator. But I
"Jim Buttafuoco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Would the plan be to add it to pg_ctl?
You would not actually have to: you could just pipe pg_ctl's output to
pglog-rotator. But I think it'd be cool if pg_ctl had an option to use
pglog-rotator, or maybe even adopt it as standard behavior.
I think
Would the plan be to add it to pg_ctl?
> Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is anyone interested in having pglog-rotator?
>
> FWIW, I saw an early version of pglog-rotator about a year and a half
> ago (while consulting for LibertyRMS), and thought at the time that
> it was pretty c
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is anyone interested in having pglog-rotator?
FWIW, I saw an early version of pglog-rotator about a year and a half
ago (while consulting for LibertyRMS), and thought at the time that
it was pretty cool. So I'm for including it ... maybe even as
mains
Since now is the time for contrib/ flamewars, this seemed a good time
to suggest this.
My colleague, Sorin Iszlai, wrote us a little program for rotating
our Postgres logs. It reads stdout and stderr, and sends them to
different files (and rotates them as necessary). It is currently
hand-configu
31 matches
Mail list logo
