Re: possible bug in logfile management

On Dom, Gennaio 8, 2006 15:41, David Leadbeater wrote:
> On 5 Jan 2006, at 12:40, Gabriele Armao wrote:
>> infact this file was quite big, 2147483647 bytes, after deleting it,
>> everything worked flawlessly
>
> That number is 1 less than 2^31, I would guess BOPM needs to use
> O_LARGEFILE (Linux, maybe different on other OSes), I've no idea about
> how portable stuff like that is though.
>
> Personally I'd prefer the log files to be rotated much before they get
> to that sort of size..

me too, but there was a DNS error that made the logfile quickly increase,
i don't know if the O_LARGEFILE flag can be a solution (as David said, in
term of portability), i don't think anybody need a 2GB logfile...but I
think that at least some warning or error message should be spit out
>
> David
>