This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 1, 2024. It is now read-only.
Added logLevelSwitch option #139
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
nblumhardt
reviewed
Dec 20, 2017
| @@ -89,7 +94,8 @@ public static class LoggerConfigurationElasticsearchExtensions | |||
| string bufferBaseFilename = null, | |||
| long? bufferFileSizeLimitBytes = null, | |||
| long bufferLogShippingInterval = 5000, | |||
| string connectionGlobalHeaders = null) | |||
| string connectionGlobalHeaders = null, | |||
| LoggingLevelSwitch loggingLevelSwitch = null) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the other public APIs exposed by Serilog, we call this levelSwitch - would be good to be consistent (if this change is accepted).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. Will align.
|
Thanks for the PR, nice addition. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What issue does this PR address?
Allows the sink to be passed a
LoggingLevelSwitchobject as an alternative to a plain minimum log level. See #138.Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No. The switch is the last argument in the public method in which it appears.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
I don't think unit tests would be appropriate here since all the code is in Serilog itself, the PR simply passes in an extra argument.
I've tested it manually and the switches operate correctly as expected (open two ES sinks, pass different switches, set different minimum levels, log only goes to one).