Re: [evlog-dev] Re: Backend patch proposal
Benoit Guillon <[email protected]> Thu, 22 Apr 2004 14:58:08 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.event-logging |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--------------7F50E11888AF06BFBD53B310 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Hello again, > Thanks for the patch, it looks good. I will do some testing and check i= n > the changes. Ok > [...] > > Don't you think it costs very much to call each backend, and each > > backend would need a filter to check if it can process the event? Thi= s > > is why I suggested to select the backend before its call. > > evlogd does filter out events (one could use 'evlconfig -s filter' to > screen out events), only events that go to the log file reach the > backends. But the idea of selecting a backend base on its filter before > its call is certainly very interesting. > > Would each backend have its own filter in the conf file? I thought about a dynamic setting. What I would like to do is for instanc= e to be able to decide that LOCAL5 facilities are routed to a centralized logger (to have statistic results on the same machine) but if I see some problems it could be interesting to change via a command the backend so that it will be routed to a backend in charge of printing out the events = on the local console (because then I would work on the faulty machine itself= ). What do you think? -- Beno=EEt Guillon [email protected] --------------7F50E11888AF06BFBD53B310 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> Hello again, <br> <blockquote TYPE=CITE>Thanks for the patch, it looks good. I will do some testing and check in <br>the changes.</blockquote> Ok <blockquote TYPE=CITE>[...] <br>> Don't you think it costs very much to call each backend, and each <br>> backend would need a filter to check if it can process the event? This <br>> is why I suggested to select the backend before its call. <p>evlogd does filter out events (one could use 'evlconfig -s filter' to <br>screen out events), only events that go to the log file reach the <br>backends. But the idea of selecting a backend base on its filter before <br>its call is certainly very interesting. <p>Would each backend have its own filter in the conf file?</blockquote> I thought about a dynamic setting. What I would like to do is for instance to be able to decide that LOCAL5 facilities are routed to a centralized logger (to have statistic results on the same machine) but if I see some problems it could be interesting to change via a command the backend so that it will be routed to a backend in charge of printing out the events on the local console (because then I would work on the faulty machine itself). <p>What do you think? <br> <pre>-- Benoît Guillon [email protected] </pre> </html> --------------7F50E11888AF06BFBD53B310-- ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click