[PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com>]

There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!

An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>

The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.

Thank you,

-Bryan

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

["McClimont, Aaron (SACE)" <Aa...@sa.gov.au>]

A late vote of +1 to keep log collation.

Regards,
Aaron McClimont

From: Bryan Call [mailto:bcall@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, 30 August 2016 7:47 AM
To: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Cc: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

Thank you for all the feedback on this proposal.  Log collation support will stay in 7.0.0.

-Bryan



On Aug 23, 2016, at 2:31 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com>> wrote:

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

Agreed!

Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0



On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com>> wrote:

Hi,

We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.

Cheers,

— leif



Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0



On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>> wrote:

Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Encouraged :)


Details:
According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
<https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>

-Bryan





On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:

Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed
to :)
-0
Thanks,
Shrihari
On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:


There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.
However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very
important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.

Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
o
ject%2
0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
% 22coll
ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
r
oject%
20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>

-Bryan





On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
<Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:

Hey guys,
I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried
using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to
work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen
many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
Thanks,
Shrihari


From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
<users@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
<users@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
"dev@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
<dev@trafficserver.apache.org
<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0


+0

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
<ma...@apache.org>> wrote:



On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
<ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:


There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
7.0.0
release.  If you are using these features and require them,
please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
feedback is very important!


An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe
and
have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is
the documentation for log collation:


https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
t
oring/
logging/log-collation.en.html
<https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
i
toring
/logging/log-collation.en.html>
<https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
i
toring
/logging/log-collation.en.html
<https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
i
toring
/logging/log-collation.en.html>>


The proposal is to remove the configurations options,
statistics,
and code for log collation.

I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
maintenance burden is very high. +0

J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

Thank you for all the feedback on this proposal.  Log collation support will stay in 7.0.0.

-Bryan




> On Aug 23, 2016, at 2:31 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
> 
> Agreed! 
> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
> To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
>> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?
> 
> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
> 
> I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> — leif
> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Rekha
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
>> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
>> 
>> Encouraged :)
>> 
>>> Details:
>>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>>> 
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>>> to :)
>>>> -0
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  
>>>>> However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very 
>>>>> important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>>> o
>>>>> ject%2
>>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
>>>>> % 22coll 
>>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
>>>>> r
>>>>> oject%
>>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
>>>>> c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Bryan
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
>>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe 
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is 
>>>>>>>> the documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> J
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Steven Hunter <st...@gmail.com>]

It seems,if you move,these applications ,there's no way to download ,and
operate any downloads .,Because only the sending system has the download
configured.,So,sending any configuration with this app requires it to be
attached rather than from the download.

On Aug 23, 2016 5:32 PM, "THOTA, REKHA" <rt...@att.com> wrote:

> >>>> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I
> would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain
> the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the
> orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
>
> Agreed!
>
> Thanks
> Rekha
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
> To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>
>
> > On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well
> for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this
> area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/TS-4475.
> > We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please
> keep this feature?
>
> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I
> would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain
> the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the
> orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
>
> I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good
> hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.
>
> Cheers,
>
> — leif
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Rekha
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
> > To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> > Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
> >
> > Encouraged :)
> >
> >> Details:
> >> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and
> non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones
> that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community
> hold a lot of weight.
> >>
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> >>
> >> -Bryan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <
> Shrihari.Kalkar@riverbed.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed
> >>> to :)
> >>> -0
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Shrihari
> >>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.
> >>>> However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very
> >>>> important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
> >>>>
> >>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
> >>>> o
> >>>> ject%2
> >>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
> >>>> % 22coll
> >>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
> >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
> >>>> r
> >>>> oject%
> >>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
> >>>> c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
> >>>>
> >>>> -Bryan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
> >>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hey guys,
> >>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried
> >>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to
> >>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen
> >>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature
> around?
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Shrihari
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
> >>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
> >>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> >>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
> >>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
> >>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
> >>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
> >>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
> >>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
> >>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
> >>>>>>>> 7.0.0
> >>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them,
> >>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that
> are willing
> >>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
> >>>>>>> feedback is very important!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe
> >>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is
> >>>>>>> the documentation for log collation:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
> >>>>>>> t
> >>>>>>> oring/
> >>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
> >>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
> >>>>>>> i
> >>>>>>> toring
> >>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
> >>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
> >>>>>>> i
> >>>>>>> toring
> >>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
> >>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
> >>>>>>> i
> >>>>>>> toring
> >>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options,
> >>>>>>>> statistics,
> >>>>>>> and code for log collation.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as
> Leif.
> >>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
> >>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
> >>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> J
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

Thank you for all the feedback on this proposal.  Log collation support will stay in 7.0.0.

-Bryan




> On Aug 23, 2016, at 2:31 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
>>>>> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
> 
> Agreed! 
> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
> To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
>> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?
> 
> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).
> 
> I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> — leif
> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Rekha
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
>> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
>> 
>> Encouraged :)
>> 
>>> Details:
>>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>>> 
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>>> to :)
>>>> -0
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  
>>>>> However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very 
>>>>> important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>>> o
>>>>> ject%2
>>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
>>>>> % 22coll 
>>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
>>>>> r
>>>>> oject%
>>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
>>>>> c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Bryan
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
>>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe 
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is 
>>>>>>>> the documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> J
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

["THOTA, REKHA" <rt...@att.com>]

>>>> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

Agreed! 

Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0


> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.

Cheers,

— leif

> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
> 
> Encouraged :)
> 
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>> to :)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  
>>>> However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very 
>>>> important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>> o
>>>> ject%2
>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
>>>> % 22coll 
>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
>>>> r
>>>> oject%
>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
>>>> c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe 
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is 
>>>>>>> the documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

["THOTA, REKHA" <rt...@att.com>]

>>>> Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

Agreed! 

Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:zwoop@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:27 PM
To: <de...@trafficserver.apache.org> <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0


> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.

Cheers,

— leif

> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
> 
> Encouraged :)
> 
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>> to :)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  
>>>> However, I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very 
>>>> important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>> o
>>>> ject%2
>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20
>>>> % 22coll 
>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=p
>>>> r
>>>> oject%
>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22
>>>> c ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS
>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe 
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is 
>>>>>>> the documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/mon
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.

Cheers,

— leif

> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
> 
> Encouraged :)
> 
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html 
>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>> to :)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, 
>>>> I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important 
>>>> in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pro
>>>> ject%2 
>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%
>>>> 22coll ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>> oject% 
>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>>> ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, 
>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 
>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the 
>>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monit
>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:21 PM, THOTA, REKHA <rt...@att.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
> We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Sounds like there’s some significant interest to keep this feature. I would like to emphasize that if we keep this, we expect people to maintain the code, fix bugs and add missing features (such as a way to handle the orphaned logs in some reasonable way).

I’m encouraged to hear that there is interest in the feature, and good hope that we will see continued development efforts in this area.

Cheers,

— leif

> 
> Thanks
> Rekha
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
> To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
> Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
> 
> Encouraged :)
> 
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html 
>> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>>> to :)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, 
>>>> I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important 
>>>> in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pro
>>>> ject%2 
>>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%
>>>> 22coll ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>>> oject% 
>>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>>> ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, 
>>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 
>>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the 
>>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monit
>>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>>> toring
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

["THOTA, REKHA" <rt...@att.com>]

Hi,

We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0


> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Encouraged :)

> Details:
> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html 
> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> 
> -Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>> to :)
>> -0
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, 
>>> I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important 
>>> in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>> 
>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pro
>>> ject%2 
>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%
>>> 22coll ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>> oject% 
>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>> ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, 
>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>> 
>>>>> +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 
>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the 
>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monit
>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> J
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Thanks guys! I would like to vote +1 to keep this feature around.

On 8/23/16, 9:56 AM, "James Peach" <jp...@apache.org> wrote:

>
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
>
>Encouraged :)
>
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and
>>non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the
>>ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the
>>community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>><https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>><Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to
>>>:)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>>>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in
>>>>the
>>>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> 
>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=projec
>>>>t%2
>>>> 
>>>>0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>>>oll
>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> 
>>>><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=proje
>>>>ct%
>>>> 
>>>>20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>>>>ati
>>>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many
>>>>>bugs
>>>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>><users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>><users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>>"dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are
>>>>>>>willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitori
>>>>>>>ng/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as
>>>>>>>Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Thanks guys! I would like to vote +1 to keep this feature around.

On 8/23/16, 9:56 AM, "James Peach" <jp...@apache.org> wrote:

>
>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.
>
>Encouraged :)
>
>> Details:
>> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and
>>non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the
>>ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the
>>community hold a lot of weight.
>> 
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>><https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>><Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to
>>>:)
>>> -0
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>>>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in
>>>>the
>>>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>>> 
>>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>>> 
>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=projec
>>>>t%2
>>>> 
>>>>0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>>>oll
>>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>>> 
>>>><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=proje
>>>>ct%
>>>> 
>>>>20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>>>>ati
>>>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>>> 
>>>> -Bryan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many
>>>>>bugs
>>>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Shrihari
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>><users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>"
>>>>><users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>,
>>>>>"dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>>> 
>>>>>> +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are
>>>>>>>willing
>>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitori
>>>>>>>ng/
>>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitor
>>>>>>>ing
>>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as
>>>>>>>Leif.
>>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> J
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>

RE: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

["THOTA, REKHA" <rt...@att.com>]

Hi,

We started using log collation feature and it seems to be working well for us. Peter Chou from our team has recently submitted an issue in this area and has been actively working on the fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-4475.
We want to continue using it and support it as needed. Can we please keep this feature?

Thanks
Rekha

-----Original Message-----
From: James Peach [mailto:jpeach@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 12:56 PM
To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
Cc: users@trafficserver.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0


> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Encouraged :)

> Details:
> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html 
> <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> 
> -Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed 
>> to :)
>> -0
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, 
>>> I don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important 
>>> in the decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>> 
>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pro
>>> ject%2 
>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%
>>> 22coll ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=pr
>>> oject% 
>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22c
>>> ollati on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar 
>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried 
>>>> using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to 
>>>> work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen 
>>>> many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <users@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, 
>>>> "dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" 
>>>> <dev@trafficserver.apache.org 
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>> 
>>>>> +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org 
>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 
>>>>>>> 7.0.0
>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, 
>>>>>> please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the 
>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monit
>>>>>> oring/
>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/moni
>>>>>> toring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, 
>>>>>>> statistics,
>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an 
>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the 
>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> J
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[James Peach <jp...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Encouraged :)

> Details:
> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> 
> -Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
>> -0
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>> 
>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>> 
>>>>> +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> J
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[James Peach <jp...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Encouraged :)

> Details:
> According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.
> 
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>
> 
> -Bryan
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
>> -0
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>>> 
>>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>>> 
>>> -Bryan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shrihari
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>>> 
>>>>> +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> J
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Details:
According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>

-Bryan




> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
> 
> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
> -0
> Thanks,
> Shrihari
> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>> 
>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hey guys,
>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>> 
>>>> +0
>>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> J
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

Yes, people in the community are allowed to vote on keeping features.

Details:
According to the Apache voting process there are binding and non-binding votes.  The binding votes are from PMC members and are the ones that count officially.  However, not officially, votes from the community hold a lot of weight.

https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>

-Bryan




> On Aug 22, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
> 
> Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
> -0
> Thanks,
> Shrihari
> On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>> don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>> decision on whether to keep this feature.
>> 
>> Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>> 0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>> ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>> 20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>> on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>>> <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hey guys,
>>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>> log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>> reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>> in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shrihari
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>>> <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>>> 
>>>> +0
>>>> 
>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>> respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>> to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>> feedback is very important!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>> have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>> documentation for log collation:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>> logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>>> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>> /logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>> and code for log collation.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>> This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>> misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>> maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>>> 
>>>>> J
>> 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
-0
Thanks,
Shrihari
On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:

>There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>decision on whether to keep this feature.
>
>Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>
>-Bryan
>
>
>
>
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>><Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hey guys,
>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> 
>> 
>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>> 
>>> +0
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>><ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>><ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>feedback is very important!
>>>> >
>>>> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>documentation for log collation:
>>>> > 
>>>>https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>> >
>>>> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>and code for log collation.
>>>> 
>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>> 
>>>> J
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Okay, I would like to vote for keeping this feature if I am allowed to :)
-0
Thanks,
Shrihari
On 8/22/16, 2:35 PM, "Bryan Call" <bc...@apache.org> wrote:

>There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I
>don¹t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the
>decision on whether to keep this feature.
>
>Simple search on bugs with ³collation² in them:
>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%2
>0%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22coll
>ation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC
><https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%
>20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collati
>on%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>
>
>-Bryan
>
>
>
>
>> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar
>><Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hey guys,
>> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using
>>log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work
>>reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs
>>in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
>> Thanks,
>> Shrihari
>> 
>> 
>> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
>> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
>> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org
>><ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
>> 
>>> +0
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org
>>><ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com
>>>><ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
>>>>release.  If you are using these features and require them, please
>>>>respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing
>>>>to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your
>>>>feedback is very important!
>>>> >
>>>> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and
>>>>have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the
>>>>documentation for log collation:
>>>> > 
>>>>https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/
>>>>logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html
>>>><https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring
>>>>/logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>>> >
>>>> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics,
>>>>and code for log collation.
>>>> 
>>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif.
>>>>This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an
>>>>misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don¹t think the
>>>>maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>>> 
>>>> J
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I don’t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.

Simple search on bugs with “collation” in them:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%20%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>

-Bryan




> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
> 
> Hey guys,
> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
> Thanks,
> Shrihari
> 
> 
> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
>> +0
>> 
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>>> >
>>> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
>>> > https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>> >
>>> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.
>>> 
>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>> 
>>> J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Bryan Call <bc...@apache.org>]

There are a few bugs that are opened around log collation.  However, I don’t think any are major issues.  Your feedback is very important in the decision on whether to keep this feature.

Simple search on bugs with “collation” in them:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%20%3D%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC%2C%20updatedDate%20DESC <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-966?filter=12338253&jql=project%20=%20TS%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND%20text%20~%20%22collation%22%20ORDER%20BY%20status%20DESC,%20updatedDate%20DESC>

-Bryan




> On Aug 22, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com> wrote:
> 
> Hey guys,
> I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
> Thanks,
> Shrihari
> 
> 
> From: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>>
> Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
> To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <users@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <dev@trafficserver.apache.org <ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0
> 
>> +0
>> 
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jpeach@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <bryan.call@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>>> >
>>> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
>>> > https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html> <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>>
>>> >
>>> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.
>>> 
>>> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0
>>> 
>>> J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Hey guys,
I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
Thanks,
Shrihari


From: Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>>
Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

+0

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jp...@apache.org>> wrote:

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.

I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0

J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Shrihari Kalkar <Sh...@riverbed.com>]

Hey guys,
I really like this feature and we use it quite often. We tried using log collation with pipes but somehow we couldn't get that to work reliably. It would be good to have this around. Have we seen many bugs in this area of code? Is it possible to keep this feature around?
Thanks,
Shrihari


From: Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>>
Reply-To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM
To: "users@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <us...@trafficserver.apache.org>>, "dev@trafficserver.apache.org<ma...@trafficserver.apache.org>" <de...@trafficserver.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

+0

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jp...@apache.org>> wrote:

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.

I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0

J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>]

+0

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jp...@apache.org> wrote:

>
> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond
> to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time
> and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very
> important!
> >
> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an
> external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for
> log collation:
> >
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html
> <
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html
> >
> >
> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and
> code for log collation.
>
> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This
> helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors
> (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is
> very high. +0
>
> J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Phil Sorber <so...@apache.org>]

+0

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 8:06 PM James Peach <jp...@apache.org> wrote:

>
> > On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0
> release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond
> to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time
> and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very
> important!
> >
> > An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an
> external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for
> log collation:
> >
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html
> <
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html
> >
> >
> > The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and
> code for log collation.
>
> I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This
> helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors
> (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is
> very high. +0
>
> J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[James Peach <jp...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
> 
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
> 
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.

I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0

J

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[英才QQ <30...@qq.com>]

+1 keeping this feature 
> 在 2016年8月21日，上午9:31，Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> 写道：
> 
> 
>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>> 
>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>> 
>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.
> 
> 
> Somewhat mixed bag on this. On the one hand, it’s a useful feature, but it’s flawed, buggy, lacking features, and worse, has no current maintainer.
> 
> +0 from me.
> 
> — Leif
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[英才QQ <30...@qq.com>]

+1 keeping this feature 
> 在 2016年8月21日，上午9:31，Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> 写道：
> 
> 
>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
>> 
>> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
>> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
>> 
>> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.
> 
> 
> Somewhat mixed bag on this. On the one hand, it’s a useful feature, but it’s flawed, buggy, lacking features, and worse, has no current maintainer.
> 
> +0 from me.
> 
> — Leif
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
> 
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
> 
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.


Somewhat mixed bag on this. On the one hand, it’s a useful feature, but it’s flawed, buggy, lacking features, and worse, has no current maintainer.

+0 from me.

— Leif

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
> 
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
> 
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.


Somewhat mixed bag on this. On the one hand, it’s a useful feature, but it’s flawed, buggy, lacking features, and worse, has no current maintainer.

+0 from me.

— Leif

Re: [PROPOSAL] Removing logs collation support in 7.0.0

[James Peach <jp...@apache.org>]

> On Aug 19, 2016, at 3:32 PM, Bryan Call <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are a few features we are looking to remove in the ATS 7.0.0 release.  If you are using these features and require them, please respond to this email.  We also need to have people that are willing to invest time and fix some of the bugs for these features.   Your feedback is very important!
> 
> An alternative solution to log collation is to log to a pipe and have an external process take care of log collation.  Here is the documentation for log collation:
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html <https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/monitoring/logging/log-collation.en.html>
> 
> The proposal is to remove the configurations options, statistics, and code for log collation.

I thought I thoughi I already replied with similar substance as Leif. This helped a lot when we started with ATS. It does have bugs an misbehaviors (eg. orphan file handling), but I don’t think the maintenance burden is very high. +0

J