> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 September 2014 18:10
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [glance][all] Help with interpreting the log 
> level
> guidelines
> On 09/16/2014 10:16 AM, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
>  > In my point of view it makes life
> > much easier if we have information where the request failed
> The request did not fail. The HTTP request succeeded and Glance returned a
> 404 Not Found. If the caller was expecting an image to be there, but it 
> wasn't,
> then it can log the 404 in whatever log level is most appropriate.
> The point is that DEBUG log level is appropriate for the glanceclient logs, 
> since
> the glanceclient doesn't know if a 404 is something to be concerned about or
> not. To glanceclient, the call succeeded.
> Communication with the Glance API server worked, authentication worked,
> and the server returned successfully stating that the image does not exist.
> -jay

Still this is not about glanceclient logging. On that discussion I fully agree 
that less is more what comes to logging.

When we try to update an image in the glance code and that fails because the 
image is not there, I do not care where that gets stated to the end user. What 
I care about is that when the user starts asking what happened, I don't get 
called up from the bed because the ops responsible for the service have no 
idea. I also care that the ops does not need to run through million lines of 
debugging logs just because they would not get the info without. The reality is 
after all that even in developer point of view the request did not fail, user 
point of view it did.

We must keep in mind that somewhere out there is bunch of people using these 
services outside of devstack who does not know the code and how it behaves 
internally. They see the log messages if any and need to try to get the answers 
for the people who knows even less about the internals.

- Erno

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to