 |
 |
What do you think would be the best value for the parameter? Lukasz 2011/5/12 Lukasz Janyst <[log in to unmask]>: > Yes. > > L. > > 2011/5/12 Tanya Levshina <[log in to unmask]>: >> Hi, >> >> If xroot daemons can not handle SIGHUP correctly, can we add "-k" option to this release and deal with log rotate later? >> >> Thanks, >> Tanya >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Lukasz Janyst <[log in to unmask]> >> Date: Thursday, May 12, 2011 8:05 am >> Subject: Re: XRootD tag and RPMs >> To: Brian Bockelman <[log in to unmask]> >> Cc: Doug Benjamin <[log in to unmask]>, Tanya Levshina <[log in to unmask]>, Douglas Strain <[log in to unmask]>, xrootd-dev <[log in to unmask]> >> >>> The copytruncate option seems to be the way to handle it if the >>> service cannot be SIGHUPed. >>> >>> Lukasz >>> >>> 2011/5/12 Brian Bockelman <[log in to unmask]>: >>> > I think the way of doing this is to set up the logrotate.d file such >>> that logrotate will: >>> > 0) Compress older logs. >>> > 1) Rotate the file. >>> > 2) Create a new file owned by xrootd. >>> > 3) Send SIGHUP to Xrootd. >>> > 4) Xrootd daemon signal handler closes the old file handle and opens >>> the new one. >>> > >>> > Lukasz is right - this is how a seasoned sysadmin expects to >>> approach log-rotation; it would be nice to support it. We might need >>> to add a new signal handler to xrootd if it doesn't do it already. >>> > >>> > HOWEVER - if we're going to muck around in this aspect (it might be >>> too late for this release), we might as well ask for syslog support. >>> I'm getting noise from some of our admins about it - some sites have >>> highly centralized syslog setups. >>> > >>> > Brian >>> > >>> > On May 12, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Lukasz Janyst wrote: >>> > >>> >> Hi Doug, >>> >> >>> >> good question. Probably not. I will check. >>> >> >>> >> Cheers, >>> >> Lukasz >>> >> >>> >> 2011/5/12 Doug Benjamin <[log in to unmask]>: >>> >>> Dear Lukasz, >>> >>> >>> >>> I agree that using the linux standard logrotator tool is the >>> best way to go. >>> >>> Does log rotator require xrootd to start and stop so that the >>> pointers to the files >>> >>> are disconnected during the rotation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Doug >>> >>> >>> >>> On May 12, 2011, at 2:48 AM, Lukasz Janyst wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Hi Tanya, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> we will cut the second rc after we do some testing with this one. >>> >>>> Your request raises a more general question of how we should handle >>> >>>> the log rotation. Specifying it as a parameter for xrootd in the >>> >>>> sysconfig file has an advantage of keeping all the settings together >>> >>>> but I would argue that we should use the standard logrotator (man >>> 8 >>> >>>> logrotate) of Linux as it is far more flexible and is widely >>> >>>> considered as "the" tool for this sort of job which is what most >>> >>>> admins would probably expect. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Let me know what you think. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Cheers, >>> >>>> Lukasz >>> >>>> >>> >>>> 2011/5/12 Tanya Levshina <[log in to unmask]>: >>> >>>>> Hi Lukasz, >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Sorry, but I just have noticed that [-k NUM] option is still >>> missing from /etc/sysconfig/xrootd configuration. This option controls >>> the number of days the log files will be kept. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Could you please add this and cut a new rc? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Thanks a lot, >>> >>>>> Tanya >>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> >>>>> From: Lukasz Janyst <[log in to unmask]> >>> >>>>> Date: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 11:58 am >>> >>>>> Subject: XRootD tag and RPMs >>> >>>>> To: xrootd-dev <[log in to unmask]>, Doug Benjamin >>> <[log in to unmask]>, Tanya Levshina <[log in to unmask]>, Douglas >>> Strain <[log in to unmask]> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>>> Dear all, >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> I have made a rc1 tag and built the RPMs which you can >>> access here: >>> >>>>>> http://xrootd.cern.ch/sw/releases/3.0.4-rc1/ >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>> >>>>>> Lukasz >>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > >> >