> On Dec. 25, 2015, 10:10 a.m., Stephan Erb wrote:
> >

I will implemnet all recommended changes.


> On Dec. 25, 2015, 10:10 a.m., Stephan Erb wrote:
> > src/main/python/apache/thermos/core/process.py, line 62
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/40922/diff/7/?file=1175316#file1175316line62>
> >
> >     `mixed` does somewhat imply that some bits go there, some other there. 
> > `both` would be more precise. 
> >     
> >     However, I can also envision that we might have something like `syslog` 
> > in the future. So, maybe specifying those as a list of applicable options 
> > would be easier to extend? The `none` case would then be an empty list.
> >     
> >     What do you think?

I will update this to `both`. Main motivation for this patch was to get 
stdout/stderr to `console` output. I can see the value of different logging 
plugins but I'd leave this tools designed specifically for that purpose. With 
`console` and `file` support you can use `docker` and its logging drivers 
(https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/logging/overview/) or tools like 
`fluentd` (http://www.fluentd.org/) which can read files, process messages and 
forward them to any output, including syslog.


> On Dec. 25, 2015, 10:10 a.m., Stephan Erb wrote:
> > src/main/python/apache/thermos/core/process.py, line 61
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/40922/diff/7/?file=1175316#file1175316line61>
> >
> >     I'd find `console` more obvious than `stream`. What do you think?

I agree! Initially I've googled for common name for stdout/stderr and I've 
found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_streams


- Martin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/40922/#review111888
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dec. 23, 2015, 5:39 p.m., Martin Hrabovcin wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/40922/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 23, 2015, 5:39 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora and John Sirois.
> 
> 
> Bugs: AURORA-1548
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1548
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This patch will provide way to **optionally** specify running process outputs 
> destination. Implementation was built on top of 
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/30695/
> 
> **What was changed:**
> 
> New `destination` parameter is available on global cluster level and also on 
> each `Process` level. Possible options are `file` (default), `stream` to 
> parent process stdout/stderr, `mixed` will split output to files and stream 
> and finally `none` to discard any logs produced by running process.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   NEWS ebfc3a6 
>   docs/configuration-reference.md cf63cfa 
>   docs/deploying-aurora-scheduler.md 73b2e04 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/bin/thermos_executor_main.py 7b7ef4b 
>   src/main/python/apache/aurora/executor/thermos_task_runner.py 25fcca2 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/config/schema_base.py 5552108 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/core/process.py 8efdfdc 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/core/runner.py 11c06a8 
>   src/main/python/apache/thermos/runner/thermos_runner.py a36bd2a 
>   src/test/python/apache/thermos/core/test_process.py 261371d 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/40922/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Unit test coverage is provided for new functionality.
> 
> I did also manual testing with mesos/docker and I made sure that logs are 
> being written to expected files and also same output gets to docker daemon.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Martin Hrabovcin
> 
>

Reply via email to