Github user joshelser commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/242
> it may be desirable to have multiple monitors
Hurm. Apparently we remember things differently. I would have said that we
were previously in agreement about only having one active monitor because of
users accidentally looking at "the wrong one" and potentially missing the
forwarded logs. I thought that's why I built that 503-response in the first
place.
> I believe we've made sufficient improvements to the log forwarding
features, so that it's no longer necessary to impose exclusivity restrictions
on all monitor features simply for log forwarding.
But they still only go to one place, don't they?
> We can probably still do something to improve the way we inform users
about log forwarding exclusivity
(operating under the assumption that logs still only go one place) this
seems overkill to me. I think the simple solution would just be to return
something that isn't `"[]" with HTTP/200` (differentiating the cases "there are
no logs" and "we are not expecting to receive any logs") when invoking the REST
calls around recent logs. I don't (yet?) understand why we need configuration
around this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
