[erlang-questions] Should we deprecate or modernize log_mf_h and rb?
Fri Apr 1 21:53:00 CEST 2016
I really like this "old" error logger, it's *easily* one of the fastest
around actually, since it can leave formatting to read time! I've hacked it
to truncate overlong entries. The rb application is also easily hackable to
suit your needs. I have a version that looks up formatting functions based
on a bit of metadata in the logged "messages".
The major boon of being so blindingly fast, is that you do not have to set
log levels at logging time. Instead you choose which log level you want to
see when investigating!
Unfortunately, straight logged binary data and formatting it at read time
appears to be majorly out of fashion :-(
If you want to keep it, I think it would be worth adding the truncation
bit, or make it accept any size log message.
On Apr 1, 2016 12:44 PM, "Siri Hansen" <erlangsiri@REDACTED> wrote:
> Hello list!
> log_mf_h is an error_logger event handler which logs events to disk and
> does log rotation. rb (report browser) is the tool for reading and
> formatting the logs. The implementation of both modules is quite old and
> outdated. The fact that there is a size field for the events of only 16
> bits, which we haven't got any complaints for, has made us believe that
> there might not be many users of these tools. I'm writing to the list to
> find out if this is correct...
> Are you using log_mf_h (e.g. by setting environment variables
> 'error_logger_mf_*' in sasl) and rb? If so, why - is it the log rotation or
> the binary logging (or both) that you are really after? Have you considered
> alternative tools?
> Kind Regards
> erlang-questions mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the erlang-questions