Yeah I thought that had already been done. Would rather not compress http logs from the proxies for 2009 if it can be avoided. Sorry for the top post,on my CrackBerry :) On 7/17/09, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The majority of the logs are > > 8579992 ./bastion2 > 12937952 ./cvs2 > 27913380 ./secondary1 > 28753276 ./192.168.1.14 > 31164048 ./192.168.1.25 > 36747548 ./proxy1 > 59465200 ./192.168.1.7 > 78840240 ./proxy2 > > > 12937612 ./cvs2/2009 > 26187812 ./192.168.1.14/2009 > 27904380 ./secondary1/2009 > 30327316 ./proxy1/2009 > 30495152 ./192.168.1.25/2009 > 54589944 ./192.168.1.7/2009 > > Is it ok to compress older month logs 01/, 02/, 03/, 04, ? > > -- > Stephen J Smoogen. > > Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for? > -- Robert Browning > > _______________________________________________ > Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list > Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list > -- Sent from my mobile device _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
