You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Anshul Gangwar <an...@citrix.com> on 2013/03/07 07:03:22 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+Enhancements.
This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
Thanks,
Anshul
On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The core requirements I see are
>
> - Write to local - in syslog format
>
> - Send to remote sylog server
>
> - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog format
>
> If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage that - I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated when we install CloudStack?
>
> Hari
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>
>>> Ram and Hari,
>>>
>>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
>>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
>>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
>>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log them
>>> to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter them and
>>> send them to syslog. Why write something else?
>>>
>>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be logged
>>> into CloudStack's logs?
>> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We need
>> to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files. Will
>> take the log4j syslogappender path then
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ram
>>
> So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we just make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
>
> --David
Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
Posted by Anshul Gangwar <an...@citrix.com>.
Hi Alex,
I will do the same as suggested by you by changing the logger for alerts.
Thanks,
Anshul
On 11/03/13 10:21, Anshul Gangwar wrote:
> Because of the class, from which I am getting alerts is present in
> com.cloud.alert package.
>
> Thanks,
> Anshul
> On 08/03/13 18:19, Alex Huang wrote:
>> Why not org.apache.cloudstack.alert? It is an apache project.
>>
>> --Alex
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Anshul Gangwar
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 9:58 PM
>>> To: Alex Huang
>>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>
>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> I will change it to package level then i.e. *com.cloud.alert *instead of
>>> *com.cloud.alert.AlertManagerImpl*.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anshul
>>> On 08/03/13 06:24, Alex Huang wrote:
>>>> Anshul,
>>>>
>>>> Like the FS. The only thing I have is it's probably better to have us actually
>>> change the log category to something like org.apache.cloudstack.alerts. It
>>> takes a little code change but would make much more sense that
>>> AlertManagerImpl.
>>>> --Alex
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Anshul Gangwar [mailto:anshul.gangwar@citrix.com]
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:03 PM
>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>
>>>>> As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
>>>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+
>>>>> E
>>>>> nhancements.
>>>>> This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Anshul
>>>>> On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The core requirements I see are
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Write to local - in syslog format
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Send to remote sylog server
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog
>>>>> format
>>>>>> If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage
>>>>>> that -
>>>>> I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated
>>>>> when we install CloudStack?
>>>>>> Hari
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
>>>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
>>>>>>>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
>>>>>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ram and Hari,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
>>>>>>>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
>>>>>>>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
>>>>>>>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log
>>>>>>>> them to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter
>>>>>>>> them and send them to syslog. Why write something else?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be
>>> logged
>>>>>>>> into CloudStack's logs?
>>>>>>> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We
>>>>>>> need to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files.
>>>>>>> Will take the log4j syslogappender path then
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we
>>>>>> just
>>>>> make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
>>>>>> --David
Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
Posted by Anshul Gangwar <an...@citrix.com>.
Because of the class, from which I am getting alerts is present in
com.cloud.alert package.
Thanks,
Anshul
On 08/03/13 18:19, Alex Huang wrote:
> Why not org.apache.cloudstack.alert? It is an apache project.
>
> --Alex
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Anshul Gangwar
>> Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 9:58 PM
>> To: Alex Huang
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> I will change it to package level then i.e. *com.cloud.alert *instead of
>> *com.cloud.alert.AlertManagerImpl*.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anshul
>> On 08/03/13 06:24, Alex Huang wrote:
>>> Anshul,
>>>
>>> Like the FS. The only thing I have is it's probably better to have us actually
>> change the log category to something like org.apache.cloudstack.alerts. It
>> takes a little code change but would make much more sense that
>> AlertManagerImpl.
>>> --Alex
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Anshul Gangwar [mailto:anshul.gangwar@citrix.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:03 PM
>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>
>>>> As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+
>>>> E
>>>> nhancements.
>>>> This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Anshul
>>>> On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The core requirements I see are
>>>>>
>>>>> - Write to local - in syslog format
>>>>>
>>>>> - Send to remote sylog server
>>>>>
>>>>> - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog
>>>> format
>>>>> If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage
>>>>> that -
>>>> I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated
>>>> when we install CloudStack?
>>>>> Hari
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
>>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
>>>>>>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
>>>>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ram and Hari,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
>>>>>>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
>>>>>>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
>>>>>>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log
>>>>>>> them to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter
>>>>>>> them and send them to syslog. Why write something else?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be
>> logged
>>>>>>> into CloudStack's logs?
>>>>>> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We
>>>>>> need to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files.
>>>>>> Will take the log4j syslogappender path then
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>
>>>>> So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we
>>>>> just
>>>> make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
>>>>> --David
RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
Why not org.apache.cloudstack.alert? It is an apache project.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anshul Gangwar
> Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2013 9:58 PM
> To: Alex Huang
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> I will change it to package level then i.e. *com.cloud.alert *instead of
> *com.cloud.alert.AlertManagerImpl*.
>
> Thanks,
> Anshul
> On 08/03/13 06:24, Alex Huang wrote:
> > Anshul,
> >
> > Like the FS. The only thing I have is it's probably better to have us actually
> change the log category to something like org.apache.cloudstack.alerts. It
> takes a little code change but would make much more sense that
> AlertManagerImpl.
> >
> > --Alex
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Anshul Gangwar [mailto:anshul.gangwar@citrix.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:03 PM
> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
> >>
> >> As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+
> >> E
> >> nhancements.
> >> This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Anshul
> >> On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The core requirements I see are
> >>>
> >>> - Write to local - in syslog format
> >>>
> >>> - Send to remote sylog server
> >>>
> >>> - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog
> >> format
> >>> If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage
> >>> that -
> >> I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated
> >> when we install CloudStack?
> >>> Hari
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
> >>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> >>>>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
> >>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ram and Hari,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
> >>>>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
> >>>>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
> >>>>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log
> >>>>> them to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter
> >>>>> them and send them to syslog. Why write something else?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be
> logged
> >>>>> into CloudStack's logs?
> >>>> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We
> >>>> need to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files.
> >>>> Will take the log4j syslogappender path then
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Ram
> >>>>
> >>> So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we
> >>> just
> >> make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
> >>> --David
Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
Posted by Anshul Gangwar <an...@citrix.com>.
Hi Alex,
I will change it to package level then i.e. *com.cloud.alert *instead of
*com.cloud.alert.AlertManagerImpl*.
Thanks,
Anshul
On 08/03/13 06:24, Alex Huang wrote:
> Anshul,
>
> Like the FS. The only thing I have is it's probably better to have us actually change the log category to something like org.apache.cloudstack.alerts. It takes a little code change but would make much more sense that AlertManagerImpl.
>
> --Alex
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Anshul Gangwar [mailto:anshul.gangwar@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:03 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>
>> As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+E
>> nhancements.
>> This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anshul
>> On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The core requirements I see are
>>>
>>> - Write to local - in syslog format
>>>
>>> - Send to remote sylog server
>>>
>>> - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog
>> format
>>> If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage that -
>> I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated when we
>> install CloudStack?
>>> Hari
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
>>>>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
>>>>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>>>>>
>>>>> Ram and Hari,
>>>>>
>>>>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
>>>>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
>>>>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
>>>>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log them
>>>>> to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter them and
>>>>> send them to syslog. Why write something else?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be logged
>>>>> into CloudStack's logs?
>>>> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We
>>>> need to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files.
>>>> Will take the log4j syslogappender path then
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ram
>>>>
>>> So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we just
>> make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
>>> --David
RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
Anshul,
Like the FS. The only thing I have is it's probably better to have us actually change the log category to something like org.apache.cloudstack.alerts. It takes a little code change but would make much more sense that AlertManagerImpl.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anshul Gangwar [mailto:anshul.gangwar@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:03 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
>
> As per discussion I have created the FS for this feature at
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Syslog+E
> nhancements.
> This will use the log4j appender to send the syslog messages.
>
> Thanks,
> Anshul
> On 09/01/13 07:22, Hari Kannan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The core requirements I see are
> >
> > - Write to local - in syslog format
> >
> > - Send to remote sylog server
> >
> > - write the messages with appropriate Log level/priority in syslog
> format
> >
> > If log4j appender could do it, we certainly should consider/leverage that -
> I'm not an expert on this, is this something that can be automated when we
> install CloudStack?
> >
> > Hari
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 9:17 AM
> > To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Ram Ganesh<Ra...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> >>> Sent: 08 January 2013 22:10
> >>> To:cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Syslog enhancements
> >>>
> >>> Ram and Hari,
> >>>
> >>> I continue to have trouble with this feature. What I'm used to
> >>> seeing in syslogs are not the things that are being described here.
> >>> They're usually some log level of an application. If there are
> >>> system events that are not logged to our own logs, why not log them
> >>> to our own logs and use the log4j syslogappender to filter them and
> >>> send them to syslog. Why write something else?
> >>>
> >>> Do you have any use cases where system events should not be logged
> >>> into CloudStack's logs?
> >> I do not think so. I think it is just the legacy code. We
> >> need to ensure that those events also get logged into the log files.
> >> Will take the log4j syslogappender path then
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ram
> >>
> > So does this obviate the need for the Syslog feature itself? Can we just
> make this a docs bug to document how to configure log4j?
> >
> > --David