log rotation

[Clenna Lumina]

Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> Clenna Lumina skrev, on 26-06-2007 23:47:
>
>> Out of curiosity is it better to use bind's rotation mechanism over
>> logrotate if you have that on your system, or does it not really
>> matter?
>
> I'm a Red Hat logrotate freak (addict) and moreover have syslog-ng
> (rpm, of course) running on all of my important production machines
> for fine-grained control.
>
> However, the one exception is bind, it does a fine job on its own
> (have multiple log files for different purposes) and using logrotate
> would simply be redundant and lead to more compulsory administration
> on my part.

Well I can understand that. OTOH, if you want all the logging setup in 
one central location (/etc/logrotate.d/ or so) would it not make more 
sense to use logrotate to handle all log rotation chores?

And multiple log files is not a problem (you can barrow from the 
pre-made apache configuration - '/etc/logrotate.d/apache' on my box - to 
do that.)

I could also see both being used. Eg, bind does it's log rotation thing 
locally as it normally would, while logroate is confiured to do it's 
thing, but saves the rotated results to a backup dir or volume somewhere 
(assuming that could be done with logrotate.)

-- 
CL