Re: access log format
"Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <002801ca385b$086e82c0$02b2a8c0@tardis> |
Hi, Alok's way is superior to kannel's DLR handling. It inserts to the DB much more information about the original message than can be obtained through the DLRs alone and passed on to the dlr-url. If anyone has reduced the resolution of the logs, I am sure it was unintentional. BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guillaume Cottenceau" <[email protected]> To: "Alok Vaidya" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 2:59 PM Subject: Re: access log format > Alok Vaidya <alok 'at' routesms.com> writes: > >> Hi, >> >> Sorry I didn't get you. > > Are you programmatically looking for sent/failed SMS by looking > at Kannel logs? > >> Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: >> >> Alok Vaidya <alok 'at' routesms.com> writes: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for replying. Yes I checked the documentation we can >> certainly have a >> custom format, but it is about the events that I talking here >> like "Sent SMS"/ >> "FAILED SMS"/"Discarded SMS" etc., I see some changes there. >> Mostly I have >> figured them out but, I fail to understand some other entries >> which I have >> mentioned below as also I want to know more such changes. >> >> Let me elaborate why this causes problems. Our parser uses >> patterns such as >> "Failed SMS" to search for current (14.2 box) entries, now this >> event logging >> has changed to "FAILED SEND SMS" naturally this will not be >> picked up and hence >> we loose on such entries. That's my point here. >> >> >> I might be a little off topic, but why not using the mechanism >> made for that kind of things, e.g. receiving delivery reports >> from Kannel? It is supported, lets you ask what information you >> need, and is of course "supported" accross versions. >> >> >> >> > > -- > Guillaume Cottenceau >