New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

jewel: rgw: reduce log level of 'storing entry at' in cls_log #15455

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 26, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@smithfarm
Contributor

smithfarm commented Jun 3, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm self-assigned this Jun 3, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm added this to the jewel milestone Jun 3, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm changed the title from jewel: reduce log level of 'storing entry at' in cls_log to jewel: rgw: reduce log level of 'storing entry at' in cls_log Jun 3, 2017

@smithfarm smithfarm added rgw cleanup and removed core bug fix labels Jun 3, 2017

cls/log/cls_log.cc: reduce logging noise
 - The other reference in the source as already at 20.
      ./src/cls/timeindex/cls_timeindex.cc:85:
	CLS_LOG(20, "storing entry at %s", index.c_str());

   And we need not always know where in the log items are stored.
   So it looks like a leftover debug feature.

Fixes: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19835
Signed-off-by: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@digiware.nl>
(cherry picked from commit d760109)
@amitkumar50

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@amitkumar50

amitkumar50 Jul 31, 2017

Contributor

@smithfarm Please update PR in tracker, so that someone else not to generate PR for same

Contributor

amitkumar50 commented Jul 31, 2017

@smithfarm Please update PR in tracker, so that someone else not to generate PR for same

@tchaikov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tchaikov

tchaikov Jul 31, 2017

Contributor

@amitkumar50 please read the description of that tracker ticket again.

Contributor

tchaikov commented Jul 31, 2017

@amitkumar50 please read the description of that tracker ticket again.

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Jul 31, 2017

Contributor

@amitkumar50 The tracker http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19838 is assigned to me and it's status is "In Progress", and the PR link is in the description. This is how we stage backports, because it's easy to automate that way.

Here is the backporting script we use: https://github.com/smithfarm/ceph-backport-scripts/blob/master/ceph_backport.sh

(Improvements welcome!)

Contributor

smithfarm commented Jul 31, 2017

@amitkumar50 The tracker http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19838 is assigned to me and it's status is "In Progress", and the PR link is in the description. This is how we stage backports, because it's easy to automate that way.

Here is the backporting script we use: https://github.com/smithfarm/ceph-backport-scripts/blob/master/ceph_backport.sh

(Improvements welcome!)

@@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ static int cls_log_add(cls_method_context_t hctx, bufferlist *in, bufferlist *ou
index = entry.id;
}
CLS_LOG(0, "storing entry at %s", index.c_str());
CLS_LOG(20, "storing entry at %s", index.c_str());

This comment has been minimized.

@amitkumar50

amitkumar50 Aug 16, 2017

Contributor

Though Its backport.
But still I am curious How increasing log-level from 0 to 20 would reduce the noise.
cls_log(level, " %s:%d: " fmt, FILE, LINE, ##VA_ARGS)

@amitkumar50

amitkumar50 Aug 16, 2017

Contributor

Though Its backport.
But still I am curious How increasing log-level from 0 to 20 would reduce the noise.
cls_log(level, " %s:%d: " fmt, FILE, LINE, ##VA_ARGS)

This comment has been minimized.

@smithfarm

smithfarm Aug 16, 2017

Contributor

@amitkumar50 The higher the log level, the more log messages Ceph emits. By moving the message to a higher log level, it will only get emitted if the user raises the log level to at least that number (20 in this case).

For more information, read http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/troubleshooting/log-and-debug/

Also, are you subscribed to the ceph-users mailing list? This kind of question could be answered there as well.

@smithfarm

smithfarm Aug 16, 2017

Contributor

@amitkumar50 The higher the log level, the more log messages Ceph emits. By moving the message to a higher log level, it will only get emitted if the user raises the log level to at least that number (20 in this case).

For more information, read http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/troubleshooting/log-and-debug/

Also, are you subscribed to the ceph-users mailing list? This kind of question could be answered there as well.

@smithfarm smithfarm requested a review from cbodley Aug 25, 2017

@smithfarm

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@smithfarm

smithfarm Aug 25, 2017

Contributor

@cbodley This passed an rgw suite at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20613#note-18 so I guess it's safe to merge.

Please review.

Contributor

smithfarm commented Aug 25, 2017

@cbodley This passed an rgw suite at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/20613#note-18 so I guess it's safe to merge.

Please review.

@smithfarm smithfarm merged commit 2b759d2 into ceph:jewel Aug 26, 2017

4 checks passed

Docs: build check OK - docs built
Details
Signed-off-by all commits in this PR are signed
Details
Unmodified Submodules submodules for project are unmodified
Details
make check make check succeeded
Details

@smithfarm smithfarm deleted the smithfarm:wip-19838-jewel branch Aug 26, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment