<div>
Hey Tim,
</div><div><br></div><div>I think a good start would be to implement Gavin's suggestion about having a more UNIXy output, since you could do this without having to change the transport.</div><div><br></div><div>If you are aggregating lots of Rabbit logs, this results in lots of double entries such as</div><div><br></div><div><div>Mar 21 12:05:30 a logger: : =INFO REPORT==== 21-Mar-2013::12:05:29 === </div><div>Mar 21 12:05:30 a logger: : started TCP Listener on [::]:5672</div></div><div><br></div><div>If I understand Gavin correctly, you could improve the SNR by putting this on one line.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div>Ben</div><div><br></div>
<div></div>
<p style="color: #A0A0A8;">On Thursday, 21 March 2013 at 12:03, Tim Watson wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;">
<span><div><div><div>Hi all,</div><div><br></div><div>We've discussed moving to a different (non-standard) logging provider before, and I'll raise the issue again. Afaik we've not run into the issues with error_logger very often (i.e., the reasons why lager was invented, viz massive memory consumption due to serialisation of large terms in logging output). The 'filtering possibilities' with lager don't necessarily require the parse_transforms to be used iirc - you can submit a logging request direct to lager and specify the log level at the call site. Again, I'll raise the discussion with the rest of the team and let's see what comes of that.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Tim</div><div><br></div><div>On 19 Mar 2013, at 08:48, Gotthard, Petr wrote:</div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div>Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that moving to lager requires any changes inside rabbitmq. Since rabbitmq (as far as I know) uses standard Erlang’s logging and since standard logs are redirected to lager, all rabbitmq related logs are processed by lager. Wihout many filtering possibilities though.</div><div> </div><div>Petr</div><div> </div><div>From: rabbitmq-discuss-bounces@lists.rabbitmq.com [<a href="mailto:rabbitmq-discuss-bounces@lists.rabbitmq.com">mailto:rabbitmq-discuss-bounces@lists.rabbitmq.com</a>] On Behalf Of Gavin M. Roy</div><div>Sent: 18. března 2013 17:36</div><div>To: Discussions about RabbitMQ</div><div>Subject: [rabbitmq-discuss] lager vs sasl error log</div><div> </div><div>Any plans to move rabbitmq.log to lager (and allow for lager-syslog) while keeping rabbit-sasl.log for crash dumps?</div><div> </div><div>Would be nice to be able to get the plugable loggers and improvements to logging performance lager purports to provide, as well as a more modern, *NIXy logging output.</div><div> </div><div>Cheers,</div><div><br></div><div>Gavin</div><div>_______________________________________________</div><div>rabbitmq-discuss mailing list</div><div><a href="mailto:rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com">rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com</a></div><div><a href="https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss">https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss</a></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>_______________________________________________</div><div>rabbitmq-discuss mailing list</div><div><a href="mailto:rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com">rabbitmq-discuss@lists.rabbitmq.com</a></div><div><a href="https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss">https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss</a></div></div></div></span>
</blockquote>
<div>
<br>
</div>