Chris, the Young One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 1 August 2000 at 12:56:46 +1200
 > On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 12:54:23PM -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
 > !                                                          This one
 > ! makes zero sense.  It's non-functional.  It doesn't connect to the way
 > ! I work. 
 > Would you prefer the splogger format (to wit, Unix timestamp with
 > fractional part) instead? I'd do anything to use a logging format
 > that avoids timezone dependency, and multilog/tai64n seems to do
 > that job well.

You mean this:
   Jul 31 06:02:10 gw qmail: 965023330.820010 status: local 1/10 remote 0/50

It's better than tai64n, because syslog puts a real timestamp on, but
that big chunk of meaningless numbers in the middle wastes a lot of
the line and adds no useful information.  It's what I'm using now on
my main server, but it's quite wasteful and annoying.  (But
qmailanalog expects it)

I can see the desire to have a timezone independent format if you're
reading logs from systems in multiple timezones.  I'm not.

Having anything other than my current timezone in plain ASCII is a big
lose for me; it means I can't correlate the logs either to each other,
or to the real world.  (Yes, the random numbers produced by tai
correlate to each other, but I can't remember them, whereas I can
remember that something happened in midafternoon pretty easily).

Multilog and splogger should really have selectable time format and
timezone settings.  I'd love to use multilog and tell it to use plain
text and central time, rather than having to involve post-processors
(which are a pain for the current log; for older logs it could be done
automatically at rollover).  You, on the other hand, could tell your
multilog to use GMT on all machines so that when you correlate them
across timezones they'd all match up right.  And then we'd both be
happier than we are now.
Photos: Minicon:
Bookworms: SF: 
David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to