[libvirt] [PATCHv2] Do not keep empty log files for deleted domains

[Daniel P. Berrangé]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 12:55:18PM +0200, Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> 
> On 09/07/2019 10.35, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > If virtlogd is active, we do *not* want logrotate doing anything at all.
> 
> Are you saying that to fix the bug at hand, I should be required to
> first implement 2 features in virtlogd and replace the current logrotate
> config (none of which caused the bug)?

I'm simply saying that trying to use logrotate at the same time
as virtlogd is not a desirable way to solve the problem. There
are a variety of other options that could be explored

> > Trying to get sensible interaction between two separate log rotation
> > apps is adding too much complexity.
> 
> It is not added. It is already there. Multiple distros I checked ship
> this as the default config. Sorry, if that wasn't your intention.

Shipping the configs is not a problem as long as make the logrotate
config a no-op when virtlogd is active, which was the intention and
is fixed in:

  https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2019-July/msg00313.html

> > Further, any purging of log files needs to take in to account what
> > guests actually exist in libvirt. The proposed change has no such
> > checks. It must only purge log files for guests which are neither
> > running, nor have any persistent config on disk, and where the log
> > file is older than "N days" for some configurable "N".
> 
> Not if time based rotation is already desired, then there is no need to
> know if the guest still exists. If its not desired, then this is as
> complicated as you say, but the existing logrotate config already
> doesn't fulfill that.

It will no longer be time based with the above fix.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|