Yes. I like the idea but we should just load the hostname during the attache's
creation rather than on every communication.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chiradeep Vittal
> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 11:20 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Marcus Sorensen
> Cc: cloudstack; Alex Huang
> Subject: Re: Review Request 13072: Print agent host name in logging of agent
> commands
>
> This of course introduces an extra DB call during EVERY agent communication.
> If there was a cache, not a big deal, but as it so happens, there isn't one.
>
> On 8/1/13 10:10 PM, "Koushik Das" <koushik....@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> >I see your point Marcus.
> >I felt that accessing the database would be simpler but you are right
> >that everyone may not have access to it. Actually the CS logs do
> >mention the host names as well but in a different place and based on
> >that you can match the id to a name. For e.g. if you look for agent
> >status logs that mentions both id and name.
> >
> >2013-07-29 10:09:47,124 DEBUG [c.c.h.Status] (AgentTaskPool-3:null)
> >Transition:[Resource state = Enabled, Agent event = Ping, Host id = 1,
> >name = xenserver-kd1]
> >2013-07-29 10:09:47,136 DEBUG [c.c.h.Status] (AgentTaskPool-3:null)
> >Agent status update: [id = 1; name = xenserver-kd1; old status = Up;
> >event = Ping; new status = Up; old update count = 78; new update count
> >= 79]
> >
> >2013-07-29 10:09:47,736 DEBUG [c.c.a.t.Request] (DirectAgent-24:null)
> >Seq
> >1-1386348573: Sending { Cmd , MgmtId: 2546680725505, via: 1, Ver: v1,
> >Flags: 100011,
> >[{"com.cloud.agent.api.StopCommand":{"isProxy":false,"executeInSequen
> ce
> >":f alse,"vmName":"i-2-45-VM","wait":0}}] }
> >2013-07-29 10:09:47,736 DEBUG [c.c.a.t.Request] (DirectAgent-24:null)
> >Seq
> >1-1386348573: Executing: { Cmd , MgmtId: 2546680725505, via: 1, Ver:
> >v1,
> >Flags: 100011,
> >[{"com.cloud.agent.api.StopCommand":{"isProxy":false,"executeInSequen
> ce
> >":f alse,"vmName":"i-2-45-VM","wait":0}}] }
> >
> >
> >The changes you have made would definitely improve the readability.
> >
> >-Koushik
> >
> >From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 7:26 PM
> >To: Koushik Das
> >Cc: cloudstack
> >Subject: Re: Review Request 13072: Print agent host name in logging of
> >agent commands
> >
> >
> >I agree, that would be useful.
> >
> >The issue im resolving here is that 1) not everyone who has access to
> >look at the logs and troubleshoot also has access to (or knows the
> >schema
> >of) the database. There might be an issue with a KVM host, but the
> >admin will waste time manually hunting down which host the command
> went
> >to because he has no idea what "via:1237" means and 2) even with db
> >access, its a major pain to go hunt down the unencrypted db
> >password(because its a long string that's hard to memorize), log into
> >the database, run a query, just to know where to continue your debugging.
> >
> >A little background: Most of the people who surf these logs aren't devs.
> >For us they are usually devs, but not cloudstack devs. Maybe UI guys or
> >some other consumer. It has happened several times where someone
> comes
> >into my office, points out an agent command, and says "any idea where
> >that went?". I pretty much have the numbers memorized by now,
> depending
> >on the zone, so I tell them which agent the command went to. Then they
> >ask me where I found that, and when I explain that this little "via: 85"
> >means to go log into the db and make an SQL query for vm_instance 85, I
> >almost always get some "gee that's useful, how was I ever supposed to
> >know that" response.
> >
> >So I do agree that the correlations you mention would also be good, I
> >disagree with the idea that there is not much value in doing this.
> >On Aug 1, 2013 6:06 AM, "Koushik Das"
> ><koushik....@citrix.com<mailto:koushik....@citrix.com>> wrote:
> >This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> >https://reviews.apache.org/r/13072/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >The changes look fine but I don't see much value with this as the name
> >can be easily identified from the db. I feel the logs are used
> >primarily for debugging issues. And one key aspect that is missing
> >currently is the correlation of logs. Currently when a API call is made
> >to MS, it traverses through various layers in the MS and finally
> >hitting the resource layer and then returns back with response. Logs
> >gets generated from each layer but it is not very intuitive to relate them to
> API call.
> >If there is a unique id (some kind of uuid) that gets appended to the
> >logs for a specific API call then correlation becomes very easy.
> >
> >
> >
> >I feel adding these kind of correlation would be much more useful.
> >
> >
> >- Koushik Das
> >
> >
> >On July 30th, 2013, 5:37 p.m. UTC, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> >Review request for cloudstack.
> >By Marcus Sorensen.
> >
> >Updated July 30, 2013, 5:37 p.m.
> >Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-3872
> >Repository: cloudstack-git
> >Description
> >
> >Print agent name when logging Commands sent to VM hosts. See bug
> >description. I'm not super familiar with this code, so I'd like
> >someone to look over it and verify it's the right thing.
> >
> >
> >Testing
> >
> >Tested on KVM zone, need help testing others.
> >
> >
> >Diffs
> >
> > * core/src/com/cloud/agent/transport/Request.java (b0fa4cc)
> > * server/src/com/cloud/agent/manager/AgentManagerImpl.java
> (b157838)
> >
> >View Diff<https://reviews.apache.org/r/13072/diff/>
> >
> >
