Enhancement of timestamp logging
Hi guys, I just open a pull request few days ago about a very simple change on xlat.c file to permit write of nanosecs when '%T' is used with linelog module. I think that could be usefull add this feature to permit offline processing of logging file for analytics, like for example TPS or bottlenecks. WDYT ? Thanks in advance for any comments. G.
On Feb 22, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Geaaru <geaaru@gmail.com> wrote:
I just open a pull request few days ago about a very simple change on xlat.c file to permit write of nanosecs when '%T' is used with linelog module.
I think that could be usefull add this feature to permit offline processing of logging file for analytics, like for example TPS or bottlenecks.
I've pushed a similar patch. Alan DeKok.
Hi, thank you very much for reply. Can you give me what is patch about this? FWIS currently on xlat.c file timestamp is set statically with 000000 as nanoseconds (row 2202 of xlat.c file of tree 3.0.x, same thing on tree 4.x on xlat_eval.c file) https://github.com/FreeRADIUS/freeradius-server/pull/1917/files G. On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 15:06 -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:
On Feb 22, 2017, at 2:10 PM, Geaaru <geaaru@gmail.com> wrote:
I just open a pull request few days ago about a very simple change on xlat.c file to permit write of nanosecs when '%T' is used with linelog module.
I think that could be usefull add this feature to permit offline processing of logging file for analytics, like for example TPS or bottlenecks.
I've pushed a similar patch.
Alan DeKok.
Yes, I know that code is public, I sent a pull request on github (see pull request #1917). But FWIS on xlat.c file (on tree 3.0.x) or on xlat_eval.c (on tree 4.0.x) there isn't a management of nanoseconds or milliseconds on logging messages. I don't find where could be currently used a timestamp with milliseconds or nanosecods on logging. FWIS currently logging timestamp with milliseconds or nanoseconds is not supported by freeradius. There is a '%T' option but milliseconds is set statically to 0000000. I currently patched my freeradius code to permit a more efficient timestamp logging, let me known if you want patch this on official tree. Good work G. On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 09:28 -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:
On Feb 23, 2017, at 4:26 AM, Geaaru <geaaru@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
thank you very much for reply.
Can you give me what is patch about this?
See the git repository on github. The code is public.
Alan DeKok.
On Feb 24, 2017, at 5:09 AM, Geaaru <geaaru@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I know that code is public, I sent a pull request on github (see pull request #1917).
You didn't check github and read the patch I put in? You didn't check the pull request to see the patch I put you?
But FWIS on xlat.c file (on tree 3.0.x) or on xlat_eval.c (on tree 4.0.x) there isn't a management of nanoseconds or milliseconds on logging messages.
I don't find where could be currently used a timestamp with milliseconds or nanosecods on logging.
FWIS currently logging timestamp with milliseconds or nanoseconds is not supported by freeradius. There is a '%T' option but milliseconds is set statically to 0000000.
I currently patched my freeradius code to permit a more efficient timestamp logging, let me known if you want patch this on official tree.
If you go read github as I request, and read your pull request, you'll see that a fixed patch is already in. Alan DeKok.
Sorry, stupid web browser cache that doesn't refresh github pages and unlucky and moreover I haven't received any notifications from github about your commit. I see only now your patch. Can I send you a new pull request also on 3.1.x and 4.0.x with same target? Thank you for your support. Sorry again. On Fri, 2017-02-24 at 08:13 -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:
On Feb 24, 2017, at 5:09 AM, Geaaru <geaaru@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I know that code is public, I sent a pull request on github (see pull request #1917).
You didn't check github and read the patch I put in?
You didn't check the pull request to see the patch I put you?
But FWIS on xlat.c file (on tree 3.0.x) or on xlat_eval.c (on tree 4.0.x) there isn't a management of nanoseconds or milliseconds on logging messages.
I don't find where could be currently used a timestamp with milliseconds or nanosecods on logging.
FWIS currently logging timestamp with milliseconds or nanoseconds is not supported by freeradius. There is a '%T' option but milliseconds is set statically to 0000000.
I currently patched my freeradius code to permit a more efficient timestamp logging, let me known if you want patch this on official tree.
If you go read github as I request, and read your pull request, you'll see that a fixed patch is already in.
Alan DeKok.
participants (2)
-
Alan DeKok -
Geaaru