SV: Logging

[Anders Berg]

The only reason would be to hold network traffic down, but we are probably talking a hell of a lot of traffic before we staurate any kind of modern line. But if the traffis is on the same network where Varnish delivers this could be a problem for some. We could also assume a dedicated network for admin and logging, but that might not always be the case/feasable, _then_ it has a point.
 
VG Netts blades have 2 NIC's on each blade when they are half height. Take into account that we are aiming for network redundancy on our rigg, we might have to hack some to get a failover solution working correctly.
 
So there is a point to it, in the future, but maybe not V 1.0.
 
Anders Berg
 
 

________________________________

Fra: varnish-dev-bounces at projects.linpro.no på vegne av Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Sendt: ma 10.07.2006 17:24
Til: varnish-dev at projects.linpro.no
Emne: Re: Logging



Anders Berg <andersb at vgnett.no> writes:
> while I might not be the right one to answer I'll give it a shot.
> Right now Varnish is logging alot of data involved in the request
> handling to shared memory on each of the Varnish servers. It's a
> shared memory buffer at a fixed size (default 8M right now I think),
> and Varnish writes to it in a FIFO manner.

It's a circular buffer, actually; varnish doesn't care if anyone reads
it.

> I am uncertain if we are gonnna implement a way to tell the Varnish
> daemon itself what we want it to logg in V 1.0.

I don't see any point in doing so.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no
_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
varnish-dev at projects.linpro.no
http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev



*****************************************************************
Denne fotnoten bekrefter at denne e-postmeldingen ble
skannet av MailSweeper og funnet fri for virus.
*****************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
MailSweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
*****************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-dev/attachments/20060710/c1a29059/attachment-0001.html>