Thank you a lot for your case description.
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013, Dan Sommers wrote:
It begets the question, that if it is easier to write a
socket-listening loging handler and forget all about
logging.config.listen() stuff. I never did it before, hence the
question.
But why develop all of that code when logging.config.listen() already
exists? Adding a new SocketHandler seems more heavyweight (and more
risky) than adjusting the logging level on an existing SocketHandler.
There are 2 reasons that i cannot just use existing API for the project I am
working on.
1. My monitoring GUI client is often behind various NAT. In fact it is a
hand-held client, I could be using it in a café's WIFI. It is impossible to
tell the python-daemon to just send the log to given address and port.
2. I forgot to explain that in my project adjusting log level is only half
of what needs to be done. The monitoring GUI client also needs to be able to
send a few operational parameters' change. e.g. I need to see the log, and
decide to change 'Threshold' from 0.5 to 0.53 and see the difference.
For the first problem, a new logging.ListeningSocketHandler would work -
don't know if it is easy to write one - which can be written in a way that
simply drops logs if no one is listening, thus forgoing logging.config.listen().
For the second problem, a way to dynamically accept new operational
paramters from socket is needed, solo logging.config.listen() wouldn't
suffice.
Either case I don't find use of logging.config.listen(), even though I am
looking hard for every way to reuse existing code.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
