Open Stack

On 07/24/2014 06:44 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> 
> On Jul 24, 2014, at 6:05 PM, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 25 July 2014 08:01, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> I'd like us to think about whether they is anything we can do to make
>>>> life easier in these kind of hard debugging scenarios where the regular
>>>> logs are not sufficient.
>>>
>>> Agreed. Honestly, though we do also need to figure out first fail
>>> detection on our logs as well. Because realistically if we can't debug
>>> failures from those, then I really don't understand how we're ever going
>>> to expect large users to.
>>
>>
>> I'm so glad you said that :). In conversations with our users, and
>> existing large deployers of Openstack, one thing has come through very
>> consistently: our default logs are insufficient.
>>
>> We had an extensive discussion about this in the TripleO mid-cycle
>> meetup, and I think we reached broad consensus on the following:
>> - the defaults should be what folk are running in production
>> - we don't want to lead on changing defaults - its a big enough thing
>> we want to drive the discussion but not workaround it by changing our
>> defaults
>> - large clouds are *today* running debug (with a few tweaks to remove
>> the most egregious log spammers and known security issues [like
>> dumping tokens into logs]
>> - AFAICT productised clouds (push-button deploy etc) are running
>> something very similar
>> - we would love it if developers *also* saw what users will see by
>> default, since that will tend to both stop things getting to spammy,
>> and too sparse.
>>
>> So - I know thats brief - what we'd like to do is to poll a slightly
>> wider set of deployers - e.g. via a spec, perhaps some help from Tom
> 
> This one would be a good place for that conversation to start: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/91446/

Right, kind of already been doing that for the last few months. :)

Assistance moving the ball forward appreciated. I think we really need
to just land this stuff in phases, as even getting through the minor
adjusts in that spec (like AUDIT change) is going to take a while. A
bunch of people have been going preemptively on it which is good.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140724/e7d739b6/attachment.pgp>