En todo caso seguiré investigando sobre como hacer esto. Por ahora no es 
importante para mi que se carguen los logs antiguos. 

Gracias
------------
En todo caso seguiré investigando sobre como hacer esto. Por ahora no es 
importante para mi que se carguen los logs antiguos. 

Gracias

El miércoles, 3 de febrero de 2016, 16:00:46 (UTC-4:30), Joi Owen escribió:
>
> I don't think it's possible to have graylog pull messages back out of 
> elasticsearch and re-create extractors.  The extractors process messages as 
> they arrive through the inputs, very early in the processing, and even 
> before streams are processed.  Once the message has left the input and 
> moved on, you can't add any more fields to it.
>
> It would be nice if one could do this, somehow.  Perhaps there is a tool 
> that can do it at the elasticsearch level?
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Roger Guzman <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> Ok, I have seen some interesting behavior in relation to the extractors: 
>> The fields begin to appear in the messages received after the moment of 
>> creation exhaust, therefore no previous messages have new fields. Now I 
>> will look how to make the extractors work for older messages.
>>
>> I attached capture messages to see this behavior
>> ----
>> Ok, he visto un comportamiento interesante en relación a los extractores: 
>> Los campos empiezan a mostrarse en los mensajes recibidos luego del momento 
>> de la creación del extractor, por ende los mensajes anteriores no poseen 
>> los nuevos campos. Ahora buscaré como hacer que los extractores funcionen 
>> para mensajes antiguos.
>>
>> Les adjunto la captura de los mensajes para que vean este comportamiento
>>
>>
>> El miércoles, 3 de febrero de 2016, 15:03:06 (UTC-4:30), Roger Guzman 
>> escribió:
>>>
>>> All extractors have used work. By clicking on the "Try" button (creating 
>>> the extractor) show matching red. As I mentioned earlier and earlier had 
>>> solved this problem through the web interface in another implementation but 
>>> forgot how to do it: '(
>>>
>>> I keep looking through the web interface and will comment any advance
>>> -------
>>> Todos los extractores que he usado funcionan. Al hacer click en el botón 
>>> "Try" (creando el extractor) muestran la coincidencia en rojo. Como comenté 
>>> anteriormente ya había resuelto este problema  desde la interfaz web en 
>>> otra implementación pero olvidé como hacerlo :'(
>>>
>>>
>>> Seguiré buscando desde la interfaz web y les comentaré cualquier adelanto
>>>
>>>
>>> El miércoles, 3 de febrero de 2016, 14:39:22 (UTC-4:30), Joi Owen 
>>> escribió:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, earlier in the thread you had a screenshot of the field creation 
>>>> form, but the match shown was in red, not in green.  It needs to be green 
>>>> before it will create the extractor field.  So, I don't think the 
>>>> extractor 
>>>> is actually working as you intended.  There is more to the form below the 
>>>> portion you captured, and I'm thinking one of those other control fields 
>>>> is 
>>>> causing the problem.  IE there is a second field that is sort of a master 
>>>> control match to decide if your more complex regexp will be applied at 
>>>> all.  IE I have it set to "apply this extractor only if message contains 
>>>> 'dhcp' in it."  That would prevent the extractor from matching even if the 
>>>> regexp to extract the IP address from the message was otherwise correct, 
>>>> but my test message from a radius server instead.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Roger Guzman <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I used the scroll my mouse is not the problem :D
>>>>> The problem is that when creating the extractor, not shown the field 
>>>>> in the search, even when the message displayed is that was used to 
>>>>> generate 
>>>>> the extractor.
>>>>> -----
>>>>> He usado el scroll, mi mouse no es el problema :D 
>>>>> El problema es que al crear el extractor, no se muestra el campo en el 
>>>>> "search tab", aun cuando el mensaje que se muestra es el que sirvió para 
>>>>> generar el extractor.
>>>>>
>>>>> El miércoles, 3 de febrero de 2016, 14:26:12 (UTC-4:30), Joi Owen 
>>>>> escribió:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand the issue, but...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> System/Input/Manage Extractors is where you create the rules that 
>>>>>> create new fields, and where you can manage existing fields.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The image you sent is from a search result, and the list of fields on 
>>>>>> the left is the list of fields which have already been extracted for the 
>>>>>> message you are viewing.  If a field is missing there, then there is an 
>>>>>> issue with the extractor defined on that message's input.  You can use 
>>>>>> the 
>>>>>> 'create extractor' item on the right which you circled to create a new 
>>>>>> extractor using that message as a sample.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alternatively, you can identify the input the message arrived from, 
>>>>>> and use the 'manage extractors' button on the System/Inputs display to 
>>>>>> create a new extractor.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The list of fields on the left has a scroll bar on the right edge, 
>>>>>> did you overlook that scroll bar?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did I understand your question?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Roger Guzman <[email protected]> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The search result displays, where the "Create extractor for field 
>>>>>>> message" submenu is deployed (Attached image). 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Previously this had happened to me (in another implemntación of 
>>>>>>> Graylog) and resolved forcing the burden of fields / extractor from the 
>>>>>>> web 
>>>>>>> interface but the truth is I do not remember where did this :S
>>>>>>> ----------
>>>>>>> El resultado de la búsqueda muestra el mensaje desde donde se 
>>>>>>> desplegó el submenú "Create extractor for field message (imagen 
>>>>>>> adjuntada).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Previously this had happened to me (in another implementation of 
>>>>>>> Graylog) and resolved forcing the burden of fields/extractor from the 
>>>>>>> web 
>>>>>>> interface but the truth is I do not remember where did this :S
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> El miércoles, 3 de febrero de 2016, 13:37:30 (UTC-4:30), Joi Owen 
>>>>>>> escribió:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've seen this happen to me a few times, and its usually one of the 
>>>>>>>> following:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *) the search result I'm currently looking at doesn't contain any 
>>>>>>>> messages that would have matched those fields.  The search tool only 
>>>>>>>> lists 
>>>>>>>> fields that appear in the current search result.  IE, if I do a search 
>>>>>>>> for 
>>>>>>>> 'dhcp' and then look at the search tool, the dhcp-related fields are 
>>>>>>>> there, 
>>>>>>>> but the radius-related fields are not.  If I do a search for '*' then 
>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>> fields are all there as long as each field appears at least once in 
>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>> result set.  
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *) the extracted variables are not on the input through which that 
>>>>>>>> set of messages arrived.  My graylog has 6 different inputs (2 gelf, 2 
>>>>>>>> tcp, 
>>>>>>>> 2 udp) and I have to place the desired extractor on all inputs where 
>>>>>>>> that 
>>>>>>>> content might arrive.  Find a message that should have displayed such 
>>>>>>>> fields, and compare the input it arrived on with the input where you 
>>>>>>>> created the extractor, and they're often different (because some admin 
>>>>>>>> decided to change their syslog configuration and are now sending their 
>>>>>>>> messages to an unexpected input.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Roger Guzman <[email protected]
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have created several extractors and the same work correctly 
>>>>>>>>> (attached image), but the fields created are not shown in the search 
>>>>>>>>> tab. Has anyone had the same problem?
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> He creado varios extractores y los mismos funcionan correctamente 
>>>>>>>>> (adjunto la imagen), pero los campos creados no se muestran en el tab 
>>>>>>>>> search. ¿Alguien ha tenido el mismo inconveniente?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>>>> Groups "Graylog Users" group.
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/d35609e2-d654-4549-bb07-b945c6cf0945%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/d35609e2-d654-4549-bb07-b945c6cf0945%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No matter what we think of Linux versus FreeBSD, etc., the one 
>>>>>>>> thing I
>>>>>>>> really like about Linux is that it has Microsoft worried. Anything
>>>>>>>> that kicks a monopoly in the pants has got to be good for something.
>>>>>>>> - Chris Johnson
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>> Groups "Graylog Users" group.
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/a0cd90b9-359c-456f-b3dc-21acd42ac1b7%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/a0cd90b9-359c-456f-b3dc-21acd42ac1b7%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No matter what we think of Linux versus FreeBSD, etc., the one thing I
>>>>>> really like about Linux is that it has Microsoft worried. Anything
>>>>>> that kicks a monopoly in the pants has got to be good for something.
>>>>>> - Chris Johnson
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>> Groups "Graylog Users" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/19a30007-2dd2-4f5e-b1a6-4cfcb65bb391%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>  
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/19a30007-2dd2-4f5e-b1a6-4cfcb65bb391%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> No matter what we think of Linux versus FreeBSD, etc., the one thing I
>>>> really like about Linux is that it has Microsoft worried. Anything
>>>> that kicks a monopoly in the pants has got to be good for something.
>>>> - Chris Johnson
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Graylog Users" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/143f9604-bcf9-4ef7-b194-ae1c6d8297ce%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/143f9604-bcf9-4ef7-b194-ae1c6d8297ce%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> No matter what we think of Linux versus FreeBSD, etc., the one thing I
> really like about Linux is that it has Microsoft worried. Anything
> that kicks a monopoly in the pants has got to be good for something.
> - Chris Johnson
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Graylog Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/graylog2/7720a229-8b92-48fa-8787-d53a0a5e7e26%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to