[systemd-devel] Fragile journal interleaving

[Uoti Urpala]

On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 18:40 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mi, 13.12.17 00:43, Uoti Urpala (uoti.urpala at pp1.inet.fi) wrote:
> > correct position, so I don't see why the monotonicity discard would be
> > needed for that case either?
> 
> I figure you are right.
> 
> Any chance you can prep a patch for this change?

A patch with a fairly long commit message explaining the rationale and
related issues attached.

BTW current sd_journal_next() documentation claims "The journal is
strictly ordered by reception time, and hence advancing to the next
entry guarantees that the entry then pointing to is later in time than
then previous one, or has the same timestamp." Isn't this OBVIOUSLY
false when talking about realtime timestamps if you don't include
caveats about changing the machine time?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-journal-fix-lost-entries-when-timestamps-are-inconsi.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 5036 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20171214/2b138f07/attachment.bin>