core0

5 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by core0 11y ago

   Ah, thanks - require_ack_response sounds like what I was missing. Some blogs are from before this was added in 0.12 so I didn't know about it. I am still interested in forwarder failure cases - I have replied to kiyoto's comment
2. 2.▲
   by core0 11y ago

   > Where does it say this? I don't think this was ever the case for Fluentd. It's in http://docs.fluentd.org/articles/high-availability#forwarder... , which says: However, possible message loss scenarios do
3. 3.▲
   by core0 11y ago

   We'd love to use a ruby-based solution like this, but the docs say it will lose data whenever the receiving end crashes. Any plans to fix that? The way it was described in the docs gave me the impression there is no acknowledgement of