Open Stack

On 10/24/2013 10:05 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
>> Example 1:
>> ==============
>>
>>      n-conductor log in tempest/devstack -
>> http://logs.openstack.org/70/52870/3/check/check-tempest-devstack-vm-full/f46b756/logs/screen-n-cond.txt.gz
>>
>>
>>      Total log lines: 84076
>>      Total non DEBUG lines: 61
>>
>>      Question: do we need more than 1 level of DEBUG? 3 orders of
>> magnitude information change between INFO -> DEBUG seems too steep a cliff.
>
> Some of them are not useful to me (but might be to others), like the
> amqp channel lines. However, everything else has been pretty crucial at
> one point or another when debugging issues that span between the two
> tightly-coupled services.

Right, which is definitely why it's a conversation, to figure out what's 
useful, and what isn't. We definitely don't want to remove things that 
are useful.

The amqp lines are 49562 of the DEBUG lines, so dropping those would 
drop our DEBUG output in more than half, which would be cool if it 
didn't have an impact of folks.

I also just wanted to raise the question, are there multiple levels of 
DEBUG that might make sense here? For instance, every received seems to 
be followed by an unpacked, which actually has info that was in the 
received hash - 
http://logs.openstack.org/70/52870/3/check/check-tempest-devstack-vm-full/f46b756/logs/screen-n-cond.txt.gz#_2013-10-23_12_25_22_524

If we had DEBUG and DEBUG2 levels, where one of them would only be seen 
at the higher debug level, would that be useful?

I'm not actually trying to pick on conductor here, but it makes a good 
example of a service that DEBUG level is extremely useful to 
development, and is used heavily, and might make us thing about multi 
levels of DEBUG to go deeper down the rabbit hole only if we really need to.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net