Re: wapbox performance

Hi,

the problem is not only with a power outage. You should think that if 
kannel crashes and you commented fflush out you will probably loss 
backtrace in log file. For a access log it's even more critical because 
you will loss messages that you sent.

It's up to you whether you will loss log or access log entries...

I would vote -1 for disabling fflush in general and +0 for disabling it 
at compile time (patch welcome).

Thanks,
Alex

Mindaugas wrote:
> 
>>Just to note about gwlib/log.c:output() and gwlib/accesslog.c:alog()
>>functions which IMHO is a base for the whole logging and both of them
>>uses platform's standard version of vfprintf implementation which
>>sometimes is buggy, slow and so on.
>>
>>Shall Kannel implement it's own implementation or maybe one defined at
>>compile time?
> 
> 
>   I doubt that it will matter. Maybe Apache uses *printf functions for
> serving
> web pages so it's critical for them.
> 
>   But I did very simple test. I wrote tiny C program which just writes into
> file
> and in one case it fflush() file handle after each fprintf() and does not do
> that
> in another case. Difference is huge:
> 
> $ time ./fflush ( without fflush() )
> 
> real    0m5.649s
> user    0m1.635s
> sys     0m3.836s
> 
> $ time ./fflush ( with fflush() )
> 
> real    1m32.389s
> user    0m5.569s
> sys     1m23.935s
> 
>   So Stipe, Alexander - can I safely comment out fflush() after vfprintf? Or
> have
> configure or configuration file setting for that? :)
>   As I've already said - I do not care if I'll loose few lines of log in a
> power outage.
> 
>   Mindaugas
> 
> 
>