On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > 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...).
I believe that that is the common set of tools for incramental parsing. Davd Lang _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog http://www.rsyslog.com
