Mailing List Archive

* Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
> I believe that both the Debian and RedHat packages enable varnishlog
> by default, is that correct?
>
> The problem is that varnishlog generates enormous amounts of data, and
> consumes a fair bit of CPU doing so. Therefore, I think varnishlog
> should be disabled by default.

In the RedHat package, a startup script is installed and added to the
chkconfig system, but it is not started after installation, and it is
not set up to start automatically at boot time. The user has to do this
manually, like 'service varnishlog start' and 'chkconfig varnishlog on'.

The post update script restarts varnishlog (and varnishd) if it is running.

Ingvar

--
Buddha wears an iPod

Ingvar Hagelund <ingvar at linpro.no> writes:
> In the RedHat package, a startup script is installed and added to the
> chkconfig system, but it is not started after installation, and it is
> not set up to start automatically at boot time. The user has to do
> this manually, like 'service varnishlog start' and 'chkconfig
> varnishlog on'.

Excellent, no change required for RedHat then.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no

Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des at linpro.no> writes:

> I believe that both the Debian and RedHat packages enable varnishlog
> by default, is that correct?

For Debian, at least, yes.

> The problem is that varnishlog generates enormous amounts of data,
> and consumes a fair bit of CPU doing so. Therefore, I think
> varnishlog should be disabled by default.

I guess...

Problem is, most of my Varnish installations are previous squid sites,
and varnish + varnishlog is less resource intensive than squid, while
performing better. Having a detailed log available by default is
incredibly useful, particularly for new sites.

Or maybe I'm more fond of having data for debugging than available
diskspace.

--
Stig Sandbeck Mathisen, Linpro

Stig Sandbeck Mathisen <ssm at linpro.no> writes:
> Problem is, most of my Varnish installations are previous squid sites,
> and varnish + varnishlog is less resource intensive than squid, while
> performing better. Having a detailed log available by default is
> incredibly useful, particularly for new sites.

I think varnishncsa delivers the kind of logs people are used to from
Squid. Enabling varnishncsa by default is fine, but varnishlog will
fill up people's disks too quickly, and they may not even be aware of
it before their log partition is full.

> Or maybe I'm more fond of having data for debugging than available
> diskspace.

The problem is that we're talking *lots* of disk space... perhaps
around 1 kB per request.

DES
--
Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav
Senior Software Developer
Linpro AS - www.linpro.no