Hi Gabriel,

Part of what gets logged isn’t know at the time I know something needs to be 
logged. The code is easiest if I can say, “Hey, please log this situation” and 
have the actual logging happen a few seconds later. As I said, this is a quick 
a dirty injection of some logging code to track down a bug. Not the normal 
thing.

However, I changed my method of doing this yesterday so I’m not using workers 
anymore. Just a background process and some interprocess arrays. Not the cool 
new way, but it does work.

Thanks.

--
Cannon.Smith
Synergy Farm Solutions Inc.
Aetna, AB Canada
<can...@synergyfarmsolutions.com>
<www.synergyfarmsolutions.com>


> On Mar 14, 2019, at 1:03 AM, GI -AJAR <gabriel.inziri...@ajar.ch> wrote:
> 
> Why do you need to run the check after few seconds?  We use this same kind of 
> worker to write logs in files. As you said, the worker assure the file not to 
> be opened. So in this contexte you know your file is accessible. You can 
> still have an error handler to handle the case where there is an unexpected 
> issue. We have a log table for those rare cases. 
> 
> I didn't try but a delay process should work in a worker but I would say it 
> is not optimal as it will make the stack of the messages to wait seconds 
> before to be processed. A worker should be fast so the next messages can be 
> process quickly. But it depend on the number of log request you send to the 
> worker. 
> 

**********************************************************************
4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG)
Archive:  http://lists.4d.com/archives.html
Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech
Unsub:  mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com
**********************************************************************

Reply via email to