On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 09:14:21AM +0200, michal.no...@lnk.ro wrote: > On Sat, Feb 02, 2019 at 02:50:39PM +0300, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: > > > This is likely just integer overflow during counter decrease, it is > > mostly harmless. We will see how to fix it. > > Hi Ondrej, thanks for quick response, and yes I agree that its mostly > harmless, > yet it upsets our monitoring, so I need to get to the bottom of it at some > point. > > > > But more people wanted it back and it seems that we can redefine it to > > both fit to per-channel stats and be less confusing (by counting best > > routes in adjacent routing table only), so it is back in the devel > > code in git, with slightly different meaning. > > OK, I see that commit, but that would not display preferred counters if > the 'keep filtered' is enabled on a given protocol.
Thanks, that was oversight. > if (c->in_keep_filtered) > cli_msg(-1006, " Routes: %u imported, %u filtered, %u > exported", > s->imp_routes, s->filt_routes, s->exp_routes); > else > cli_msg(-1006, " Routes: %u imported, %u exported, %u > preferred", > s->imp_routes, s->exp_routes, s->pref_routes); > > > My preference would be to print out all the 4 counters (including 0 for > filtered > if disabled), and the rationale behind this idea is that this would allow for > at least > some degree of backwards compatibility with scripts that used to parse the > Routes line > in bird 1.6 deployments, which again for reference used to look like this: No, BIRD 1.6.x does not print out 'filtered' when 'keep filtered' is disabled. So for compatibility it would make sense to not print it either. Also reporting 0 does not make sense as there may be routes that were filtered, we just do not have information to know how many. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
