On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Rainer Gerhards wrote:
From: [email protected] [mailto:rsyslog-
[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
deliberatly breaking the subject here to call attention to this portion
of a prior post
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, [email protected] wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011, Todd Michael Bushnell wrote:
Is it also a viable solution for files containing logs from, for
example, Log4j where I have log entries that may be different
severity levels? If not, I'm sure I can break up accordingly.
Performance wise, is this a production grade alternative to using
Logger to throw log messages at the domain socket? I wasn't sure
given that the online docs for configuring Apache do not mention imfile.
It isn't designed for this, I wonder if the new parser stack can be
made to work with imfile (since Rainer is working on modifications in
this area, it may be a good time for this to be added)
I'm wondering if it would make sense to change imfile to use a parser stack
like the other inputs, this way if you have a file with specific formats
you
could easily write a parser to do a excellantjob with that format.
I don't know if the exiting paragraph variation to imfile could be
re-worked as a set of parsers, of if they would need to remain, with
the parser kicking in on the data selected (line, or paragraph based)
the default parser would be 'make all the data be the message, and set the
type and severity from config variables' to match existing behavior.
This sounds like a very interesting approach. But I'd like to wait for the
imfile refactoring to finish, because the more we change in existing code,
the harder it becomes to merge both together.
I was definantly thinking in terms of this happening in the new version,
not the existing one.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
rsyslog mailing list
http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
http://www.rsyslog.com
