| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
erskie
-
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 31
Location: ALL over
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:59 pm Post subject: effect of access.log size on server speed |
 |
|
All,
Possibly a silly question:
I have noticed that access.log grows at an alarming rate (which is a good thing!). What I was wondering is if anyone has noticed that the size of this file, which is permanently held in memory (?) has any effect of server speed? How often do people clear the file?
Cheers,
Erskie
_________________
'Smile', he said, 'things could get worse...'
So I smiled, and things got worse... |
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
AbyssUnderground
-
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 3855
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It should not affect the speed as it only adds to the end of the file. The server never has to read the file (only needs to know its there to write to).
Aprelium can give you more detail on this.
_________________
Andy (AbyssUnderground) (previously The Inquisitor)
www.abyssunderground.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
 |
|
aprelium
-
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 6800
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:21 pm Post subject: Re: effect of access.log size on server speed |
|
|
| erskie wrote: | | What I was wondering is if anyone has noticed that the size of this file, which is permanently held in memory (?) has any effect of server speed |
The file is never held in memory. Data is appended to it on the disk. So even if you have 64 MB of RAM, your log file can grow to 1 GB without any problems.
_________________
Support Team
Aprelium - http://www.aprelium.com
Last edited by aprelium on Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:48 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
 |
|
erskie
-
Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 31
Location: ALL over
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:12 pm Post subject: Conclusion |
|
|
Thank you very much. I appreciate the quick response!
_________________
'Smile', he said, 'things could get worse...'
So I smiled, and things got worse... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loloyd
-
Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 435
Location: Philippines
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not really on authority on this but, in theory, a potential bottleneck would be your operating system's filesystem. In my programming experience, there does EXIST some speed slow-down when I'm appending to larger files (text-file, append mode only; method described as open filehandle in append mode; write one line; close filehandle). I'm talking about a text file that is over 200 megabytes in size. I never did measure how long the lag was, but I FELT that it was indeed there. Nevertheless, the slow-down may not be of any significant difference.
Ultimately, depending on your website's circumstances, this may or may not pose significant performance degradation. This is another selling point for rotating your log files by a certain criteria.
_________________
 http://home.loloyd.com/ is online if the logo graphic at left is showing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aprelium
-
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Posts: 6800
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loloyd wrote: | | I'm not really on authority on this but, in theory, a potential bottleneck would be your operating system's filesystem. In my programming experience, there does EXIST some speed slow-down when I'm appending to larger files (text-file, append mode only; method described as open filehandle in append mode; write one line; close filehandle). I'm talking about a text file that is over 200 megabytes in size. I never did measure how long the lag was, but I FELT that it was indeed there. Nevertheless, the slow-down may not be of any significant difference. |
That's right. It also depends on the fragmentation level of the hard drive and on many other parameters. NTFS partitions handle this operation better than FAT.
_________________
Support Team
Aprelium - http://www.aprelium.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
