Oh! selinux (slap to forehead). Hadn't considered that. I've run into issues
with it before, so good call. I'll see what I can figure out there. I'll be back
in touch in a bit. Thanks!
One of the clients I want to monitor is a web server with a pretty heavy amount
of logging. From what I've read, I will run the risk of losing messages from it
or other clients that are trying to communicate at the same time. I'm hoping
that RELP will mitigate that risk. I'm not too worried about losing web service
messages, but my luck guarantees that an important log entry would be lost
while an unimportant entry will always get through.
----------------------------------------
> From: denverpilot@xxxxxx
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:25:27 -0700
> To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: remote logging with rsyslog
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 8:16 AM, Nelson Green <nelsongreen84@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I can change things around so that tcp is used instead of RELP, and everything
> > works that way. The problem is specific to using RELP in the normal background
> > mode. I also tested the above RELP configuration on two Debian Wheezy boxes,
> > each running rsyslog v5.8.11, and everything worked as expected. So the problem
> > seems to be specific to CentOS with RELP.
>
> Haven't tried it, but smells like selinux messing with you. Could also be a permissions problem on opening the port.
>
> What specifically is TCP not capable of that RELP is? Just curious... looked at their webpage and it claims it's "reliable" but most of the internet hasn't found TCP to be very unreliable for decades...? (Reinventing the wheel?)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
