While I don't have an answer for you, my experience with structured logging output has been very much the same as what you described below. If anyone has suggestions on how to work around them (especially tracebacks), it would be a great help!
-- Jon Chappell [email protected] On March 25, 2014 at 1:08:10 PM, Damjan Georgievski ([email protected]) wrote: On 18 March 2014 01:07, Damjan Georgievski <[email protected]> wrote: > Anyone using logstash to collect uwsgi logs? > What are some best practices when configuring uwsgi - or for that matter > logstash too. > > Especially wrt tracebacks from python, ruby and php applications which are > often multiline. my issues so far: - python and ryby exceptions are logged line per line (unlike php exceptions) - the uwsgi startup messages are also logged line per line, it would be much better if it was logged a single message - what's the equivalent to "log-reopen = true" when using "logger = file:..." - I have to use the following snippet to have both logstash and stdout logging: logger = stdout file:/dev/tty log-route = stdout ^ plugins = msgpack logger = logstash socket:192.168.9.10:1717 log-encoder = msgpack:logstash map:4|str:message|msg|str:hostname|str:%h|str:version|str:%V|str:appname|str:%n log-route = logstash ^ The claim on http://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.org/en/latest/Logging.html that ... logger = file:/tmp/foobar # This logger will log everything as it's not named ... seems to not be true, it doesn't log to tty like that -- damjan _______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list [email protected] http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
_______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list [email protected] http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
