httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Randy Terbush <>
Subject Re: phase II
Date Thu, 25 May 1995 01:57:40 GMT
::Regarding logging..
> The other logging process can then do all the dirty work of 
> writing a logfile entry.
> > and then pipe it to some really good logging program that we write and 
> > distribute with Apache, how likely a contender could that be for CLF2?
> If Apache (and other servers) just dump raw data (as above), CLF2 could
> be unecessary. Log analyzer writers could just bundle their own program
> to create the logfiles.
> Hmm, this has great "pass-the-buck" potential. It's easy to extend, and 
> the dirty work is done by someone else's code. We could write one which
> dumps the current CLF.


Writing to a named pipe works nicely, but here are the issues that I
have encountered.

1. Only one logger daemon can read from a pipe at one time. Aside from 
using sockets, the only solution I see to this is to provide a "spigot"
that is capable of increasing the number of pipes as they are requested.
I am beginning to prefer the idea of the server providing a socket
interface for these little suckers to attach to.  The server could
either be writing the same information to all established sockets,
or we could provide a per socket configuration for the information.

I prefer the idea of the socket and write *everything* to the listening
process. Let the logger determine what to do with it.

2. I would like to see this group create our own log format. It
would be easy to provide a logger daemon that converted it to CLF
and wrote it to a flat file.  I would like to see Apache sending
access dates in integer format and logging the IP address only.

Reducing the output of the present CLF to this. - - 81100035 GET /man/Perl5/perlfunc.html HTTP/1.0 200 135964


If we could come to some concensus on this much, we could move forward
with this and implement the addons after this is working.

View raw message