View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Summi n00b
Joined: 04 Jul 2002 Posts: 6
|
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2002 7:35 pm Post subject: Switching to Metalog |
|
|
Bonjourrrr!
I read several times that metalog is the better syslogger, so I decided to get rid of sysklogd. No I get a boot-warning message like: "it's not a good idea to use two system-loggers".
Also, I checked /var/log/messages... metalog did not write files there.
I uninstalled it with "emerge -C sysklogd"
and updated rc-update with "rc-update del sysklogd" and
"rc-update add metalog default"
Can anybody tell me what else I must do to get metalog working?
Thanks a lot! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Beforegod Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 Posts: 1494 Location: Frankfurt/Main
|
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2002 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hi,
um not 100% sure, but you must delete a file called sysklogd in /etc/env.d or /etc/conf.d
iam nit 100% sure where the file is located, but you should delete it, then the warning goes away |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Summi n00b
Joined: 04 Jul 2002 Posts: 6
|
Posted: Mon Jul 08, 2002 10:09 pm Post subject: Problem solved |
|
|
Thanks!
I found the file under /etc/init.d
Working great now. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asimon l33t
Joined: 27 Jun 2002 Posts: 979 Location: Germany, Old Europe
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2002 2:22 pm Post subject: Re: Switching to Metalog |
|
|
Summi wrote: |
I read several times that metalog is the better syslogger, so I decided to get rid of sysklogd. |
What are the advantages and disadvantages of metalog? As far as I can see development of metalog and the metalog mailing list are both quite dead. Because the current version number is 0.6 I guess it was never really finished. So are there any "issues" or bugs with metalog 0.6?
Currently I use syslog-ng together with logrotate. If there are reasons why metalog would be a better solution than syslog-ng I would like to know them.
A google search did not found any interesting sites comparing the various sysloggers out there.
Cheers,
Andreas |
|
Back to top |
|
|
delta407 Bodhisattva
Joined: 23 Apr 2002 Posts: 2876 Location: Chicago, IL
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2002 5:24 pm Post subject: Re: Switching to Metalog |
|
|
asimon wrote: | Because the current version number is 0.6 I guess it was never really finished. |
What, there has to be a _.0 release?
Anyway, metalog does some nifty things (like buffering) that make it faster than other loggers. Unfortunatley, this buffering can get on people's nerves when they want to see log messages as they happen, which is why metalog understands SIGUSR1 (to disable buffering) and SIGUSR2 (to re-enable buffering). It often uses less resources than other system loggers. _________________ I don't believe in witty sigs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
therootshell n00b
Joined: 05 Jul 2002 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2002 7:43 pm Post subject: Why Metalog, you say? |
|
|
I picked metalog over syslog-ng for 3 reasons: 1. metalog is small and fast, 2. metalog rotates the logs automagically, and 3. because the config files are easy as pie to setup.
Setting up metalog is absolutly brain dead simple, especially using emerge. It has one config file, which is tiny and simple - even with a ton of filters. It literally takes seconds to setup - the log rotation settings are first, then the filter rules. The filter rules allow for regex in the filters (just like syslog-ng), actions to be taken if needed, and are as clear as it gets for a logger. Edit the rotation to your liking and add whatever filters you desire, and bam, you are done.
I should mention that this is for a desktop and/or personal server. For a medium or large server I'd think about using syslog-ng simply because it has the ability to run without needing root privilages. Then again, metalog's buffering would be handy in terms of that little bit of extra performance that every sysadmin wants out of their server. I suppose in that situation it would be a bit tougher of a decision... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|