httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From (Rodent of Unusual Size)
Subject Re: Keep it simple
Date Tue, 19 Aug 1997 18:15:50 GMT
>From the fingers of Brian Behlendorf flowed the following:
>Regarding enhancing custom logging to do a bunch of conditional things,
>named formats, replacements for mod_log_agent/referrer, etc:
>I very strongly feel that this is a slippery slope for us to be walking
>upon; that everything proposed here can be done completely *outside* the
>web server software, with a perl script or even a separate binary program
>we release.

    I can sum up the problem I see with that in one word: CustomLog.  No
    way can something we provide adapt nicely to all the different
    formats people have in use.  Not without significant hackery on
    their part - in which case why bother, if it's not good enough OOTB?

>             Its inclusion in Apache will add code, directives, promises of
>future support, and complexity, with not much gain over using a separate

    I disagree.  I see massive, massive gain potential in terms of being
    able to control disk activity and space consumption through
    controlling what gets logged.

    I'm sure there are people who really only want to log accesses to
    their stuff from people *outside* their department (or whatever),
    but they have to wade through or otherwise discard the mass of stuff
    from *inside* in order to find them.

    Being able to log by status to a separate file - such as a pipe to a
    notifier - would be really cool, too (an outgrowth of Rob's idea).

>Now that we have a fairly robust graceful restart system, rotating web logs
>and running a perl script on them every day, hour, even 10 minutes is no
>big deal.

    Not for you, maybe, and maybe not for me - but there are more than
    half a million sites out there.  *I* wouldn't presume to speak for
    them, but I *will* give 'em rope. <g>  Nobody's forcing them to use
    the new functionality - and if they do, it's a win by definition.

>           What more do we have to gain by putting that logic directly in

    Performance, flexibility.  So far, the conceptual +1s seem to be
    from Ken, Rob, Marc, Randy, Paul, and Dean - and I think most of
    those are based on the flexibility issue rather than the performance
    one.  (Opinions about implementation differ more widely. ;-)

    Do we need to do markey surveys for our enhancements? :-(

    Maybe I *should* ask "how many people would like this" in

    #ken    :-)}

View raw message