On Thu, Jul 08, 2021 at 02:18:32PM +0200, William Lallemand wrote: > I saw that you hesitated between "conn_status" and "conn_err_code", the > "conn_" prefix could be confusing at some point once you try to have > errors on the frontend and the backend side in the same log-format, I > think something starting by "fc_conn_" would be more understandable.
Indeed, and more consistent with what we already have. fc_* is for the front connection, bc_* is for the back connection. By the way if we're focusing on SSL it should even be ssl_fc_* (we already have a ton of them, nobody will find the new one if it doesn't use the same prefix). > That seems good to me, we only need frontend info IMHO. People who need > the SSL backend connection are not the most common case so they could > make their own log-format with it. I tend to think that if we're focusing on https vs http, it makes sense to consider the frontend only as well for the standard logs. Also some background on the log format, originally we used to place the URI at the end of the line because most loggers used to truncate logs at 1024 bytes and the tail of the URI was far less important than other fields. This explains why we've started to insert certain fields at certain places before this. 20 years later I think it is perfectly reasonable to consider appending fields *after* the URI, which is also a great way of applying minimal changes to existing log parsers, and to allow http/https log lines to be easily compared when aligned. Willy
