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.gang...@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:da...@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<ram.gan...@citrix.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@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
