No actually they are. Systemd has an export format and a JSON library you can attach to that produces a version of the log designed for combining. Systemd works far better with messaging clients than syslogd because it was written after messaging and networks.
I wouldn't say converting all that metadata to text is great for the network. You have to parse all that JSON on the receiver end.
SysD's binary logs have another, serious flaw: they are not designed to be sent over a network. This has been an intrinsic part of syslog for a looong time.
There are a few tools to send journald logs remotely, but they rely on tailing the binary log, then reformatting it and transmitting it over HTTPS to another tool on the destination system.
I found a feature request for journald/sysd/whatever to enable network logging, and the solution they are adding is to... tail the binary logs with basically the same tools.
Putting the disk in the middle and depending on file tailing is such a bad solution. Many things can cause this to fail; it's a total kludge.
I discovered this when investigating how to send journald logs to Splunk. The solution there is to... tail the binary logs with journald to a text file and have Splunk monitor the text file.
Now, this is not a fatal flaw. Journald could (I assume) be enhanced to natively send logs over a network. But, this shows that systemd is not enterprise-grade or production-grade, and was not designed with that kind of reliability in mind.
Hiring [Obama's campaign manager] was a smart move for Uber. The man knows, how to improve pubic perception of anything. Not that I disapprove of his current employer, but to sell the country the shit-sandwich we have in the White House today -- that's a sign of a true master.
Sigh... Haters gonna hate...
Instead of repeating that same, tired meme, why don't you use your big boy words and put together a real response? I've exposed you as a hypocrite and either an idiot or a troll. Are you too stupid to defend yourself?
As I explained to you previously, the vernacular "hater" implies jealousy, which does not apply here, so you are misusing the word.
So what do you actually mean? Because, looking at your "shit sandwich" quote above, it seems like you are the hater, by your own misuse of the word.
This is where you would normally demand a citation. [...]
* mi really believes that a campaign manager-turned-spokesperson has more power than megabillionaires who have pledged to raise A BILLION DOLLARS for a presidential campaign. This means mi is an idiot.
* mi doesn't believe what he just said, and is a troll.
I see, that you find my ideas intriguing. Would you like to subscribe to my newsletter?
Ha, you self-aggrandizing jackass. I just called you out on your crazy bullshit by applying reason. Is this the best response you have?
There are intelligent people who can put together strong arguments for libertarianism. You ain't one of them!
Please, don't hate...
I see our vocabulary lesson from last time didn't stick.
It's not hate, it's contempt. I have no respect for you because you're a total asshole and almost everything you say shows poor judgment. You clearly don't give half a shit about what is true and what isn't - you spew diarrhea all over the forums here and bring down the level of discourse. Are you actually APK?
While we are repeatedly told [salon.com] to hate on rich donors like Koch brothers, it is people like Mr. Plouffe, who really run the country...
This is where you would normally demand a citation. I love how you demand nothing short of black-and-white proof from those on the other side of an argument, but then you make totally absurd, hyperbolic comments like the above with no evidence at all.
So either:
* mi really believes that a campaign manager-turned-spokesperson has more power than megabillionaires who have pledged to raise A BILLION DOLLARS for a presidential campaign. This means mi is an idiot.
* mi doesn't believe what he just said, and is a troll.
I believe you. Fraud is rampant right now (in the USA, anyway) because law enforcement is totally underfunded and unable to deal with the problem. As I said in another post, this is by design, and LE in the states is focused on street crime.
Years back, someone stole a corporate Amex from my mailbox and ran up thousands of dollars in charges, including a car rental. The rental agency said they had a copy of the person's driver's license, and would provide it to the police. I filed a police report, and they never investigated.
All the police had to do is get the copy of the driver's license and go make an arrest. I guess it was more important to go bust some kids for smoking pot.
This is a pretty good analogy, because Facebook is a walled garden, like AOL was in its heyday.
Cross-domain e-mail and multi-domain web pages killed AOL's model.
We are just a few protocols away from having a federated social network. The biggest gap is a way to look people up on the broader Internet and negotiate a "trust" connection.
I'm sure facebook would fight very hard against this kind of interoperability. It would not kill fb, but would reduce it from The Social Network to just a major hub on the larger social network.
- wrong. 2 things are necessary for free markets to exist:
1. equal application of all laws to all individual regardless of their individual circumstances.
2. protection of ownership and operation of private property against the government intrusion, against the mob and the collective.
Are you saying that a free market does not require protection against monopolies?
PA can provide both things, by suspending out if your need shift from consumer audio (PA) to Pro audio using jackd. No need to dedicate your box to either; they can both work for whenever people need different solutions.
Are you really saying that a feature of pulseaudio is the ability to disable pulseaudio and use something else?
I see a lot of posts complaining about anti-systemd zealotry here, but clearly there is a lot of zealotry all around. I can't recall any other topic in Linux history that has been this divisive, and that is part of the problem.
When I tried to configure PA to use a sample rate over 100KHz last year, it consistently brought down the entire system. This was on a very capable machine, and high sample rates should be a basic use case for PA. I didn't dig into the cause, but it was PA itself that thrashed the CPU, so it seems unlikely that particular defect was caused by the layers underneath.
Please note that PA is for consumer audio, that means general purpose desktop and sound server use. It works great for that and doesn't drain batteries and so on. For specialized use or Pro audio where latency is king ALSA directly or jackd. No PA expert but if the driver/hardware doesn't support sampling above 96 kHz you should expect problems. +100kHz really is an unusual user case.
Well, this was on a high-end consumer soundcard (that most definitely supported the sample rate). There is a healthy and growing demand for higher sample rate tracks (e.g. hdtracks.com seems to be doing well).
I should try again with a recent version of PA to see if it has the same problems. IIRC, even 96 KHz seemed to stress PA.
Hopefully the open source community will review kdbus code very carefully and perform security testing before adopting this.
They will. Sure there will be lots of sparing and harsh word duels, and not everybody will be happy, but that is how the process works for any major kernel feature. In the end the process tend to produce good enough results.
A previous poster linked to a post by Eric Biederman that should be required reading for this Slashdot thread. I'm not sure which part to quote, because the whole thing is pretty damning: Kdbus needs meaningful review
On one hand, the post (and lack of kdbus in kernel 4.1) seem to indicate that you are correct, and the process is working. OTOH, Eric argues that:
Kdbus code is nowhere near ready for a merge, it hasn't been reviewed, and in fact may need major reworking before it can be used or reviewed.
Kdbus authors are pushing the merge very aggressively, and have made a habit of ignoring criticism and refusing to take steps necessary to even make the code reviewable.
This post was from last week.
Having used Linux audio from before PA came into existence, and having used PA from the beginning, I can assure that PA was a major step forward in fixing Linux audio. With PA sound on Linux actually began to work. Sure it exposed a lot of kernel bugs (drivers) and ALSA bugs in the beginning, and some distros and software got the implementation wrong, but it lead to the first coordinated bug fixing effort between drivers, ALSA and user space. PA was always rock solid for me, and while it had some bugs, but far the most serious and numerous was in the drivers and in ALSA layer.
Yeah, I don't know. I've been using Linux for 20 years, and of course it's steadily become much more usable. My experience with PA was that it implemented some very useful features, but was not rock solid.
When I tried to configure PA to use a sample rate over 100KHz last year, it consistently brought down the entire system. This was on a very capable machine, and high sample rates should be a basic use case for PA. I didn't dig into the cause, but it was PA itself that thrashed the CPU, so it seems unlikely that particular defect was caused by the layers underneath.
(Khm, an up-moded ad-hominem -- I must be deep into a hostile territory...)
There was no ad-hominem argument, it was an accusation. You talk like a jackass, so I called you a jackass. You are a jackass.
Well, the "contract of adhesion", according to your own link, is one characterized by:
Learn to read. The article said those items you listed factor in to court decisions. The definition was the first paragraph.
The first sentence of the definition was:
A standard form contract drafted by one party (usually a business with stronger bargaining power) and signed by the weaker party (usually a consumer in need of goods or services), who must adhere to the contract and therefore does not have the power to negotiate or modify the terms of the contract.
Mandatory, non-negotiable employment contracts are adhesion contracts.
You're exactly the kind of asshole who will argue that the sky is not blue, when it's plain as day. That's why people always mod your comments down, because you're a fucking idiot and a troll.
Banning enforcement of certain aspects of a contract may be useful. But it deprives the parties of the freedom to meaningfully enter into such contracts, and I'm not at all sure, the utility ought to outweigh the liberty.
As for the freedom level I find the argument unconvincing.
mi does not actually make arguments. In this case, Stanford academics made the argument that the utility DOES outweigh the liberty, and supplied evidence worthy of peer review.
mi just waves his hands and spouts simpleminded diarrhea, pretending to have some cohesive philosophy.
They are talking about bans on NONCOMPETE contracts. Competition is supposed to be the driving force that makes capitalism work.
If you would take off your kindergarten thinking cap and act like a real adult, you would see that some regulation is necessary to keep everything free.
In my state (Georgia), non-compete contracts were specifically banned in the constitution until the Republicans snuck through a constitutional amendment with some amazingly blatant doublespeak.
The ballot read:
Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to make Georgia more economically competitive by authorizing legislation to uphold reasonable competitive agreements?
Unfortunately, the state is full of enough weak-minded sheep that the amendment won 2:1.
That sounds reasonable to me. If were running a security group, I would take care of as much in-house as I possibly could. I especially wouldn't allow business partners to scan my gear.. There is just too much risk there.
There are a couple differences with Anthem, though.
1. They are being audited by regulators, and your business-to-business relationships are different.
2. Anthem was not able to document its internal vulnerability scans, while it seems like your company is diligent about this.
Here's a quote from the OIG:
"However, Anthem provided us with conflicting statements about its procedures, and ultimately was unable to provide satisfactory evidence that it has ever had a program in place to routinely monitor the configuration of its servers."
That sounds more like a company with shoddy security trying to hide its failings behind a specious policy.
Slashdot Mirror
Does it? If so, then it's not as bad, but needing to chain these commandline tools together to send logs over the network is still a kludge.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but do you have a reference for that?
I wouldn't say converting all that metadata to text is great for the network. You have to parse all that JSON on the receiver end.
I guess you didn't actually read that article, which is about configuring a systemd unit file to start/stop Splunk.
SysD's binary logs have another, serious flaw: they are not designed to be sent over a network. This has been an intrinsic part of syslog for a looong time.
There are a few tools to send journald logs remotely, but they rely on tailing the binary log, then reformatting it and transmitting it over HTTPS to another tool on the destination system.
I found a feature request for journald/sysd/whatever to enable network logging, and the solution they are adding is to... tail the binary logs with basically the same tools.
Putting the disk in the middle and depending on file tailing is such a bad solution. Many things can cause this to fail; it's a total kludge.
I discovered this when investigating how to send journald logs to Splunk. The solution there is to... tail the binary logs with journald to a text file and have Splunk monitor the text file.
Now, this is not a fatal flaw. Journald could (I assume) be enhanced to natively send logs over a network. But, this shows that systemd is not enterprise-grade or production-grade, and was not designed with that kind of reliability in mind.
You clearly don't like the USA, so get out. Move to Hong Kong or Singapore. http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
Instead of repeating that same, tired meme, why don't you use your big boy words and put together a real response? I've exposed you as a hypocrite and either an idiot or a troll. Are you too stupid to defend yourself?
As I explained to you previously, the vernacular "hater" implies jealousy, which does not apply here, so you are misusing the word.
So what do you actually mean? Because, looking at your "shit sandwich" quote above, it seems like you are the hater, by your own misuse of the word.
Ha, you self-aggrandizing jackass. I just called you out on your crazy bullshit by applying reason. Is this the best response you have?
There are intelligent people who can put together strong arguments for libertarianism. You ain't one of them!
I see our vocabulary lesson from last time didn't stick.
It's not hate, it's contempt. I have no respect for you because you're a total asshole and almost everything you say shows poor judgment. You clearly don't give half a shit about what is true and what isn't - you spew diarrhea all over the forums here and bring down the level of discourse. Are you actually APK?
This is where you would normally demand a citation. I love how you demand nothing short of black-and-white proof from those on the other side of an argument, but then you make totally absurd, hyperbolic comments like the above with no evidence at all.
So either:
Personally, I think mi is an idiot *and* a troll.
I believe you. Fraud is rampant right now (in the USA, anyway) because law enforcement is totally underfunded and unable to deal with the problem. As I said in another post, this is by design, and LE in the states is focused on street crime.
Years back, someone stole a corporate Amex from my mailbox and ran up thousands of dollars in charges, including a car rental. The rental agency said they had a copy of the person's driver's license, and would provide it to the police. I filed a police report, and they never investigated.
All the police had to do is get the copy of the driver's license and go make an arrest. I guess it was more important to go bust some kids for smoking pot.
No, the real problem is that the USA is very tough on street crime and very lax on white collar fraud.
This is by design. Republicans underfund any agency that enforces these kinds of laws.
This is a pretty good analogy, because Facebook is a walled garden, like AOL was in its heyday.
Cross-domain e-mail and multi-domain web pages killed AOL's model.
We are just a few protocols away from having a federated social network. The biggest gap is a way to look people up on the broader Internet and negotiate a "trust" connection.
I'm sure facebook would fight very hard against this kind of interoperability. It would not kill fb, but would reduce it from The Social Network to just a major hub on the larger social network.
Learn to use commas, jackass. That comma changed the semantics of your sentence.
Are you saying that a free market does not require protection against monopolies?
Are you really saying that a feature of pulseaudio is the ability to disable pulseaudio and use something else?
I see a lot of posts complaining about anti-systemd zealotry here, but clearly there is a lot of zealotry all around. I can't recall any other topic in Linux history that has been this divisive, and that is part of the problem.
Well, this was on a high-end consumer soundcard (that most definitely supported the sample rate). There is a healthy and growing demand for higher sample rate tracks (e.g. hdtracks.com seems to be doing well).
I should try again with a recent version of PA to see if it has the same problems. IIRC, even 96 KHz seemed to stress PA.
A previous poster linked to a post by Eric Biederman that should be required reading for this Slashdot thread. I'm not sure which part to quote, because the whole thing is pretty damning: Kdbus needs meaningful review
On one hand, the post (and lack of kdbus in kernel 4.1) seem to indicate that you are correct, and the process is working. OTOH, Eric argues that:
This post was from last week.
Yeah, I don't know. I've been using Linux for 20 years, and of course it's steadily become much more usable. My experience with PA was that it implemented some very useful features, but was not rock solid.
When I tried to configure PA to use a sample rate over 100KHz last year, it consistently brought down the entire system. This was on a very capable machine, and high sample rates should be a basic use case for PA. I didn't dig into the cause, but it was PA itself that thrashed the CPU, so it seems unlikely that particular defect was caused by the layers underneath.
Hopefully the open source community will review kdbus code very carefully and perform security testing before adopting this.
Pulseaudio-style bugs and instability could be very bad in the kernel.
Don't change the subject. We were talking about what an idiot you are.
Just in this thread, you've managed to:
I'm not even addressing your childish Ayn Randian pseudo-philosophy.
You seem to be having a lot of trouble with basic ideas. Let me help. Here is urbandictionary's top definition for hater:
I promise you, I am not jealous of you. You're such an asshole that I feel compelled to call you out on your idiotic bullshit.
"Hater," in the sense you are using it, implies some kind of jealousy. Nobody is jealous of you.
There was no ad-hominem argument, it was an accusation. You talk like a jackass, so I called you a jackass. You are a jackass.
Learn to read. The article said those items you listed factor in to court decisions. The definition was the first paragraph.
The first sentence of the definition was:
Mandatory, non-negotiable employment contracts are adhesion contracts.
You're exactly the kind of asshole who will argue that the sky is not blue, when it's plain as day. That's why people always mod your comments down, because you're a fucking idiot and a troll.
mi does not actually make arguments. In this case, Stanford academics made the argument that the utility DOES outweigh the liberty, and supplied evidence worthy of peer review.
mi just waves his hands and spouts simpleminded diarrhea, pretending to have some cohesive philosophy.
No, jackass, it's a contract of adhesion.
You're a troll and an idiot.
They are talking about bans on NONCOMPETE contracts. Competition is supposed to be the driving force that makes capitalism work.
If you would take off your kindergarten thinking cap and act like a real adult, you would see that some regulation is necessary to keep everything free.
In my state (Georgia), non-compete contracts were specifically banned in the constitution until the Republicans snuck through a constitutional amendment with some amazingly blatant doublespeak.
The ballot read:
Unfortunately, the state is full of enough weak-minded sheep that the amendment won 2:1.
That sounds reasonable to me. If were running a security group, I would take care of as much in-house as I possibly could. I especially wouldn't allow business partners to scan my gear.. There is just too much risk there.
There are a couple differences with Anthem, though.
Here's a quote from the OIG:
That sounds more like a company with shoddy security trying to hide its failings behind a specious policy.
You seem to be arguing that disallowing third-party scans is normal, but you admitted your company allows Rapid7 to conduct biweekly scans.