Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015 08:42:47 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: > Thomas Güttler writes: > > ... > > Why we are unhappy with logging to files: > > > > - filtering: We don't want to get INFO messages over the VPN. > > You can quite easily control at what level messages are logged with > the standard Python logging framework. Each handler has a level > and will ignore messages at a lower level.
I want INFO to be logged and stored on the remote host. Therefore I must not filter INFO messages. I don't want to pull INFO messages over the VPN. Ergo, the filtering at Python level does not help in my use case. Or I am missing something. And now I have an ugly soup. The ugly soup is a text file with not well defined syntax. It looks line based. But sometimes there are log messages which span multiple lines .... Remember: "Life is too short to (re)write parsers" Yes, there are tools to parse that soup. But why create this soup in the first place? That's why I want to move from file based logging to a different solution. Unfortunately there too many choices (graylog, logstash, sentry, ...) :-( > > - Rotating: Rotating files is possible, but somehow cumbersome. > > There are standard tools to rotate logfiles. > > > - Support structured logging of values (json) in the future. > > Again, the Python logging framework is quite flexible with > respect to the format of logged messages. > > > ... > > Which solution could fit for our environment? > > I work for a customer with a similar environment (he uses "Zope" instead > of "Django") - and he uses logfiles. The logfiles are automatically > rotated and there are in the order of half a dozen to a dozen logfiles > per day. > > When I have to analyse a problem with the help of the logfiles, > I do not copy them via VPN but do the filtering remotely and only > copy the filtered portion, if necessary. Good to know that I am not the only one running servers in remote intranets. Regards, Thomas Güttler -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
