On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 07:18:04PM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > From: Shradha Gupta <shradhagu...@linux.microsoft.com>
> > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2025 9:06 PM
> > > > +static void convert_tm_to_string(char *tm_str, size_t tm_str_size)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct tm tm;
> > > > + time_t t;
> > > > +
> > > > + time(&t);
> > > > + gmtime_r(&t, &tm);
> > > > + strftime(tm_str, tm_str_size, "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S", &tm);
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > Now the function is unnecessary since v2 uses syslog(), which already
> > > prefixes every message with a timestamp.
> >
> > Hi Dexuan,
> > I have deliberately kept this timestamp in the raw message so that
> > if/whenever they are redirected to other file, irrespective of the
> > configuration of the syslog we have valid timestamp for debugging
>
> A message produced by syslog() is always prefixed with a timestamp,
> and IMO can't be redirected. By "redirected to other file", I guess
> you mean systemd's options StandardOutput= and StandardError=
> for a service, but those are stdout/err, not syslog().
rsyslog can be configured to forward syslog logs from a service to a file.
If the timestamp template in rsyslog.conf is not configured, the timestamps
would be missed in forwarded file.
But I think that would be an issue to be handled by the script/service
forwarding these logs. It can be easily fixed by adding the timestamp
template.
I will remove the timestamp from the raw log message then. Thanks
>
> > > > +static void kvp_dump_initial_pools(int pool)
> > > > + [...]
> > > > + for (i = 0; i < kvp_file_info[pool].num_records; i++)
> > > > + syslog(LOG_DEBUG, "[%s]: pool: %d, %d/%d key=%s
> > > > val=%s\n",
> > > > + tm_str, pool, i, kvp_file_info[pool].num_records,
> > >
> > > Can you change the 'i' to 'i+1'? This makes the messages a little more
> > > natural to users who are not programmers :-)
> > sure, but I am just worried that might cause confusion when someone
> > tried to co-relate it with the actual kv_pool_{i} contents that start
> > with 0.
> IMO these messages are mostly for admins, who would feel more
> natural when seeing N/N as the last element, compared with N-1/N.
Got it, will modify this too
>
> Thanks,
> Dexuan
