On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 05:36 -0700, [email protected] wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > > > On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 14:11 +0200, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > >> I have a bit of a problem with the dynamic nature of rsyslog. As you know, > >> almost everything is loaded, so from the rsyslog core's PoV there is little > >> known in advance. However, the core has some "base objects", like inputs > >> and > >> actions. There is common code for these and there are common properties. > >> Actually, rsyslog employs objects in an OO-type of manner, where e.g. input > >> is the super class of each of input modules, which "inherit" from it. > >> > >> The <input type="imtcp"> thing was designed with that class structure on my > >> mind. So I had a clear indication that this is an input and so I know where > >> to look up. > >> > >> If I now get <imtcp ...> I don't know immediately what I am dealing with. > >> Granted, I probably just need to adopt the way I look at it. Probably I > >> need > >> to craft a facility where modules can register XML entity names and tell > >> the > >> core what type of entity it is. Maybe I need some time to adapting to that. > >> > >> Anyhow, and as you seem to be online right now, don't you think there is a > >> problem with that method. Especially when thinking about rsyslog's dynamic > >> nature? > > > > I think I just identified one myself. Let's assume that plugins can > > register xml entities. But that means that the xml parser can only be > > called after all plugins are loaded (because the plugins need to be > > loaded first). So I think the actual plugin load process could NOT be > > specified inside the main rsyslog.conf. Am I right here? > > it depsnds on the parser that you use. > > if you use a parser that parses everything and gives you back a resulting > data structure in one lump then you are right > > but there are also incremental parsers that have callbacks as they hit > each tag, those callbacks can do anything, including loading modules, > defining new allowed tags, etc. > > as XML files get bigger, people have moved to the incremental versions so > that they don't have to handle the entire file at once before doing > anything. >
This sounds like I should look into SAX, right? (at first glimpse, it seems to be a very good fit...). Rainer _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
