Conversation
We have journal_file_print_header(), but it's not exposed anywhere in a way that it is easy to call.
It's easier to think about the size in "objects", not bytes. Let's convert to bytes at the last moment. Also drop some of the pointless size suffixes. In general, it's the size of the variable that matters, not the constant that is written to it. No functional change.
As discussed in #38399, "ordinary" systems can have the field table with a large number of values, causing journal rotation to occur early. For example, audit generates a log of fields: $ journalctl --fields | rg -c '^_?AUDIT' 114 It seems that the "structured log" capabilities of the journal are being use more than in the past. Looking at some journal files on my system, it seems the field hash table field is quite high in many cases: $ build/test-journal-dump /var/log/journal/*/* | rg 'table fill' Data hash table fill: 15.1% Field hash table fill: 69.1% Data hash table fill: 4.9% Field hash table fill: 32.4% Data hash table fill: 10.2% Field hash table fill: 34.2% Data hash table fill: 9.9% Field hash table fill: 37.2% Data hash table fill: 26.8% Field hash table fill: 21.9% Data hash table fill: 35.6% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 25.5% Field hash table fill: 54.1% Data hash table fill: 3.4% Field hash table fill: 43.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 70.3% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 63.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 74.2% Data hash table fill: 35.6% Field hash table fill: 43.2% Data hash table fill: 35.5% Field hash table fill: 75.4% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 59.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 56.5% Data hash table fill: 16.9% Field hash table fill: 76.3% Data hash table fill: 18.1% Field hash table fill: 76.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 42.0% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 32.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 21.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 21.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 21.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 21.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.5% Data hash table fill: 9.6% Field hash table fill: 53.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.2% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.2% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.2% Data hash table fill: 35.6% Field hash table fill: 75.1% Data hash table fill: 33.6% Field hash table fill: 50.2% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 26.7% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 25.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 29.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 25.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 31.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 18.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 22.2% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 20.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 29.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 30.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 28.5% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 28.5% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 25.8% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 25.2% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 39.3% Data hash table fill: 50.2% Field hash table fill: 75.1% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 61.9% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 56.5% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 58.6% Data hash table fill: 48.9% Field hash table fill: 79.6% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 71.5% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 60.1% Data hash table fill: 31.4% Field hash table fill: 75.7% Data hash table fill: 27.0% Field hash table fill: 69.4% Data hash table fill: 28.9% Field hash table fill: 76.6% Data hash table fill: 60.2% Field hash table fill: 79.9% Data hash table fill: 8.8% Field hash table fill: 78.7% Data hash table fill: 5.8% Field hash table fill: 61.3% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 64.0% Data hash table fill: 61.4% Field hash table fill: 63.4% Data hash table fill: 29.7% Field hash table fill: 61.9% Data hash table fill: 18.9% Field hash table fill: 30.9% Data hash table fill: 1.4% Field hash table fill: 22.2% Data hash table fill: 0.4% Field hash table fill: 13.5% Data hash table fill: 2.6% Field hash table fill: 37.5% Data hash table fill: 1.3% Field hash table fill: 23.4% Data hash table fill: 0.6% Field hash table fill: 15.3% Data hash table fill: 18.7% Field hash table fill: 33.9% Data hash table fill: 7.4% Field hash table fill: 37.5% Data hash table fill: 20.2% Field hash table fill: 44.1% Data hash table fill: 1.3% Field hash table fill: 33.0% Data hash table fill: 75.0% Field hash table fill: 19.2% Data hash table fill: 42.2% Field hash table fill: 23.4% Data hash table fill: 1.6% Field hash table fill: 87.1% Data hash table fill: 0.1% Field hash table fill: 98.8% Data hash table fill: 0.2% Field hash table fill: 128.8% Data hash table fill: 15.4% Field hash table fill: 31.2% Data hash table fill: 7.4% Field hash table fill: 22.5% Data hash table fill: 10.5% Field hash table fill: 38.7% Data hash table fill: 2.8% Field hash table fill: 18.0% Data hash table fill: 1.5% Field hash table fill: 15.9% Data hash table fill: 0.0% Field hash table fill: 7.5% Data hash table fill: 0.1% Field hash table fill: 12.0% Data hash table fill: 0.2% Field hash table fill: 10.8% Data hash table fill: 0.2% Field hash table fill: 15.6% Data hash table fill: 0.1% Field hash table fill: 11.7% Data hash table fill: 0.1% Field hash table fill: 12.0% Data hash table fill: 0.0% Field hash table fill: 6.6% Data hash table fill: 1.4% Field hash table fill: 18.0% Data hash table fill: 0.7% Field hash table fill: 16.8% Data hash table fill: 1.1% Field hash table fill: 18.0% Data hash table fill: 0.2% Field hash table fill: 10.8% Data hash table fill: 0.1% Field hash table fill: 10.8% Data hash table fill: 0.4% Field hash table fill: 11.1% Since filling of the field hash table to 75% normally causes file rotation, let's double the default to make rotation happen less often. We'll use 11kB more for the hash table, which should be fine, considering that journal files are usually at least 8 MB. Closes #38399.
- move to TEST-07-PID1, as it is a timer setting, - rename the timer and service, to emphasize they are for testing DeferReactivation=, - use timeout command to wait for the timer being triggered several times, - stop the timer when not necessary, - accept 9 seconds as delta, as there are fluctuations. Fixes the following failure: ``` TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + last= TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + read -r time TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + '[' -n '' ']' TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + last=1753779616 TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + read -r time TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + '[' -n 1753779616 ']' TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + delta=9 TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + '[' 9 -lt 10 ']' TEST-74-AUX-UTILS.sh[422]: + echo 'Timer fired too early: 9 < 10' ``` Fixes #38403.
Need to see what is actually being written down socat to debug #37626
As prompted by #38393, search domains may be large when a complicated network setting is used, especially when VPN is used. Let's bump the limit to 1024. Note, this does not bump the maximum number of DNS servers, as setting thousands of DNS servers is spurious and mostly meaningless. Let's keep the maximum for a while until someone requests to also bump them. Continuation of b950ee0. Closes #38393.
Gives enum definitions for the DHCPv6 options from RFC9527 and RFC 9686 and the new message types defined in RFC 9686.
It seems the failing test in #37626 is due to MONOTONIC_USEC= being somehow lost. Add a trailing newline when sending messages with socat, hopefully ensuring it is delivered and read.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See Commits and Changes for more details.
Created by
pull[bot] (v2.0.0-alpha.3)
Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )