In upstream Nova master we're currently logging ec2 wsgi requests twice,
once in the paste pipeline, and once in eventlet.

The following patch removes the paste pipeline portion -
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/67736/

However... I'm not very satisfied with this approach, as the resulting
log entries look as follows (lots more examples at -
http://logs.openstack.org/36/67736/7/check/check-tempest-dsvm-full/9b0eb3e/logs/screen-n-api.txt.gz?level=INFO)

... "POST /services/Cloud/ HTTP/1.1" status: 200 len: 2099 time: 0.8823061
... "POST /services/Cloud/ HTTP/1.1" status: 200 len: 449 time: 0.1196980
... "POST /services/Cloud/ HTTP/1.1" status: 200 len: 2095 time: 0.4743402
... "POST /services/Cloud/ HTTP/1.1" status: 400 len: 360 time: 0.5385840
... "POST /services/Cloud/ HTTP/1.1" status: 200 len: 449 time: 0.1317410

Because the eventlet logger is only logging the requestline (which is
the URL), Post requests are basically completely information free.

We have an equally opaque problem in the Nova API with server actions:

... "POST
/v2/85979842c31049fab70bcdd399cb9a3f/servers/4d5c5ba0-a975-4f4b-863a-390ad58e1c48/action
HTTP/1.1" status: 202 len: 185 time: 1.1360781

Because these aren't really RESTful interfaces, so the url is not useful
enough to determine the action.

My feeling is that we need to make the wsgi request logs useful enough
to know what was actually called on an API call, which means I'm not
convinced we can actually use the eventlet logger for Nova, because our
URLs aren't actually RESTful.

I'm slightly surprised that in v3 we do the same thing. Could we at
minimum change .... action urls to action/ACTIONNAME, or would that
completely not work with our router?

        -Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
[email protected] / [email protected]
http://dague.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to