Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv2] Do not keep empty log files for deleted domains
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 12:55:18PM +0200, Jan Zerebecki wrote:
On 09/07/2019 10.35, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> If virtlogd is active, we do *not* want logrotate doing anything at all.
Are you saying that to fix the bug at hand, I should be required to
first implement 2 features in virtlogd and replace the current logrotate
config (none of which caused the bug)?
I'm simply saying that trying to use logrotate at the same time
as virtlogd is not a desirable way to solve the problem. There
are a variety of other options that could be explored
> Trying to get sensible interaction between two separate log
rotation
> apps is adding too much complexity.
It is not added. It is already there. Multiple distros I checked ship
this as the default config. Sorry, if that wasn't your intention.
Shipping the configs is not a problem as long as make the logrotate
config a no-op when virtlogd is active, which was the intention and
is fixed in:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2019-July/msg00313.html
> Further, any purging of log files needs to take in to account
what
> guests actually exist in libvirt. The proposed change has no such
> checks. It must only purge log files for guests which are neither
> running, nor have any persistent config on disk, and where the log
> file is older than "N days" for some configurable "N".
Not if time based rotation is already desired, then there is no need to
know if the guest still exists. If its not desired, then this is as
complicated as you say, but the existing logrotate config already
doesn't fulfill that.
It will no longer be time based with the above fix.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|