decibel wrote:
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 2:00 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
> >Well ... "life better" really depends on which failure scenario you're
> >more comfortable with ... personally, I'd rather lose log messages
> >than
> >have the DB system go down. Of course, if auditing is critical to
> >your
> >scenario, then your priorities are different ...
>
> Bingo. I'm thinking we should make mention of this in the docs...
I propose the following patch.
--
Alvaro Herrera
http://www.CommandPrompt.com/The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Index: doc/src/sgml/config.sgml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/alvherre/Code/cvs/pgsql/doc/src/sgml/config.sgml,v
retrieving revision 1.224
diff -c -p -r1.224 config.sgml
*** doc/src/sgml/config.sgml 24 Aug 2009 20:08:31 -0000 1.224
--- doc/src/sgml/config.sgml 3 Sep 2009 22:03:00 -0000
*************** local0.* /var/log/postgresql
*** 2408,2413 ****
--- 2408,2426 ----
is dynamic-linker failure messages).
This parameter can only be set at server start.
</para>
+
+ <note>
+ <para>
+ The logging collector is designed to never lose messages. This means
+ that in case of extremely high load, server processes could be
+ blocked due to trying to send additional log messages when the
+ collector has fallen behind. In contrast, <application>syslog</>
+ prefers to drop messages if it cannot write them, which means it's
+ less reliable in those cases but it will not block the rest of the
+ system.
+ </para>
+ </note>
+
</listitem>
</varlistentry>
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (
pgsql-docs@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
