Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Am Mittwoch, 16. September 2015 07:58:11 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: > Thomas Güttler writes: > > Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 11:03:52 UTC+2 schrieb jmp: > > ... > >> Something like (python 2.7) > >> > >> import logging > >> > >> logCfg = { > >> 'remote':( > >> logging.StreamHandler()

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Thomas Güttler writes: > Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 11:03:52 UTC+2 schrieb jmp: > ... >> Something like (python 2.7) >> >> import logging >> >> logCfg = { >> 'remote':( >> logging.StreamHandler(), >> logging.Formatter('Remote - %(levelname)s - %(message)s'), >>

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

On 09/15/2015 11:35 AM, Thomas Güttler wrote: Yes, I could do it this way. But somehow I am not happy with this solution. I think the filtering should be outside of python. [snip] Can you understand my concerns? Thomas Güttler No, not really. I showed you how it can be done in p

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 10:18:11 UTC+2 schrieb marco@colosso.nl: > On Friday, September 11, 2015 at 9:22:42 AM UTC+2, Thomas Güttler wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015 08:42:47 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: > > > Thomas Güttler writes: > > > > ... > > > > Why we are unhappy with loggin

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Am Freitag, 11. September 2015 11:03:52 UTC+2 schrieb jmp: > On 09/11/2015 09:22 AM, Thomas Güttler wrote: > > > > I want INFO to be logged and stored on the remote host. > > Therefore I must not filter INFO messages. > > > > I don't want to pull INFO messages over the VPN. > > > > Ergo, the filter

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Thomas Güttler writes: > Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015 08:42:47 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: >> Thomas Güttler writes: >> > ... >> > Why we are unhappy with logging to files: >> > >> > - filtering: We don't want to get INFO messages over the VPN. >> >> You can quite easily control at what level me

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

On 09/11/2015 09:22 AM, Thomas Güttler wrote: I want INFO to be logged and stored on the remote host. Therefore I must not filter INFO messages. I don't want to pull INFO messages over the VPN. Ergo, the filtering at Python level does not help in my use case. Or I am missing something. Proba

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

On Friday, September 11, 2015 at 9:22:42 AM UTC+2, Thomas Güttler wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015 08:42:47 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: > > Thomas Güttler writes: > > > ... > > > Why we are unhappy with logging to files: > > > > > > - filtering: We don't want to get INFO messages over the VPN.

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015 08:42:47 UTC+2 schrieb dieter: > Thomas Güttler writes: > > ... > > Why we are unhappy with logging to files: > > > > - filtering: We don't want to get INFO messages over the VPN. > > You can quite easily control at what level messages are logged with > the stand

Re: From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Thomas Güttler writes: > ... > Why we are unhappy with logging to files: > > - filtering: We don't want to get INFO messages over the VPN. You can quite easily control at what level messages are logged with the standard Python logging framework. Each handler has a level and will ignore messages

From logging to files to a better solution: syslog, Sentry, Logstash, ....

Up to now we use simple logging to files. We don't use syslog or an other server based solution. I am unsure which architecture works for our environment. Our environment: - django based applications - a lot of batch/cron jobs (non web gui) processing - One linux server runs several systems.