Re: [Sqlgrey-users] Logging

[Rene J. <rg...@ba...>]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 12:05:39AM +0100, Lionel Bouton wrote:

> >I've written a small patch for SQLgrey so it'll write out how long tim=
e
> >the cleaning took and how much was deleted.
> Cool. Never thought of that but it's warmly welcomed.

It's nice to know how long time SQLgrey didn't answer on requests from
Postfix, and also how many rows that was deleted, without writing a lot
of lines to syslog (20-30k lines pr. hour in our setup)

> >It won't iterate on the deleted lines in connect if the loglevel is
> >too low
> Even cooler !

Seemed like a waste of time, it could probably take a second or two
more. I actually looked for something like $self->{server}{log_level},
but couldn't find it :-)

> Ok, the only things I changed is the log level used for the time spent=20
> cleaning (in quiet mode I don't want a log line every 30 minutes) and=20
> the log syntax (it's a matter of taste).

The log syntax was inspired by Diablo (NNTP-software) because I couldn't
come up with something myself :)

> Maybe a log level won't suit us anymore as we don't put the same=20
> loglevel on the same information.
[...]

Sounds like a cool idea, with the large volume of mail in our system we
(me, myself and I) don't want the "Probable spam" logging, but I would
like to see the lines from the DB-cleaning (Right now i've just changed
the loglevel on that one line in 1.4.2), so tuneable logging would be a
nice feature. Maybe you should start the 1.5.x branch :o)

> It is now in my tree and your name in the Changelog. I'll have to add a=
=20
> THANKS file for you and most of the subscribers here. Last time I looke=
d=20
> there were less than 20 people subscribed and a large proportion helped=
=20
> with sound enhancement requests, performance reports, bug reports and s=
o=20
> on, thanks guys.

It always nice to help enhancing a good piece of software/idea.

Speaking of performance reports, do you need more info to be able to
decide on which indices to use?

--=20
-Ren=E9