[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Goodaire) writes:
> I've compared the libc and kernel versions between a misbehaving machine and a
> machine that is logging properly and they're the same:
[ scratches head... ] So what's different?
Anyway, if you are interested in trying to cut libc out of the equation,
t
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 04:51:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> No, syslogger is single-threaded so it can't be at fault. The
> interleaving must be happening when the data is inserted into the pipe
> that leads to syslogger. We've got multiple backends concurrently
> writing that pipe, remember.
>
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Note to hackers: would it make sense to use write() instead of
>> fprintf() in send_message_to_server_log to avoid any possibility
>> of stdio deciding to fragment the message? Possibly there'd be
>> some marginal efficiency gain too.
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 15:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tim Goodaire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > While going through some log files, we noticed that some of the log entries
> > are "garbled". For example:
>
> > 2007-03-27 01:19:44.139 UTC [1761474] oxrsa aepp xx.xx.xx.xx LOG:
> > duratio2007-03
Tom Lane wrote:
Note to hackers: would it make sense to use write() instead of
fprintf() in send_message_to_server_log to avoid any possibility
of stdio deciding to fragment the message? Possibly there'd be
some marginal efficiency gain too.
What about in write_syslogger_file_binary()? Sinc
Tim Goodaire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While going through some log files, we noticed that some of the log entries
> are "garbled". For example:
> 2007-03-27 01:19:44.139 UTC [1761474] oxrsa aepp xx.xx.xx.xx LOG:
> duratio2007-03-n: 3751.27 01:19801 ms :44.139 statemenUTC [421940]
> oxrt: E
