F21 Self Contained Change: Remote Journal Logging
Marc Deop i Argemí
marc at marcdeop.com
Wed May 7 15:36:42 UTC 2014
On Tuesday 22 April 2014 06:34:48 Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.04.14 12:46, Bill Nottingham (notting at splat.cc) wrote:
> > Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek at in.waw.pl) said:
> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 04:20:16PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > > Jaroslav Reznik (jreznik at redhat.com) said:
> > > > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Remote Journal Logging =
> > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remote_Journal_Logging
> > > > >
> > > > > Change owner(s): Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek at in.waw.pl>
> > > > >
> > > > > Systemd journal can be configured to forward events to a remote
> > > > > server.
> > > > > Entries are forwarded including full metadata, and are stored in
> > > > > normal
> > > > > journal files, identically to locally generated logs.
> > > >
> > > > What's the future of gatewayd if this becomes more widely used?
> > >
> > > gatewayd works in pull mode. Here I'm proposing a push model, where the
> > > "client" (i.e. machine generating the logs) pushes logs to the server
> > > at the time of its own chosing. gatewayd is probably better for some use
> > > cases, this for others.
> > I understand the pull vs push distinction ... I'm just not clear why pull
> > would ever be a model you'd want to use. (vs something like a local
> > cockpit
> > agent.)
> Pull is the only model that scales, since the centralized log infrastructure
> can schedule when it pulls from where and thus do this according to
> available resources. THe push model is prone to logging bursts
> overwhelming log servers if you scale your network up.
"Push" mechanism seems to scale pretty well when we talk about web sites.
Specially taking into account that you mentioned that systemd is going to use
https protocol, you can take advantage of many existing solutions to
scale/load balance your systems. (although that doesn't mean I agree on the
election of the protocol)
> I am pretty sure that a pull model should be the default for everything
> we do, and push only be done where realtimish behaviour is desired to do
> live debugging or suchlike.
For me it should be precisely the other way around(in syslogging context)
> I am pretty sure the push model concept is one of the major weaknesses
> of the BSD syslog protocol.
Again I disagree: for me is a strong point :-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the devel