Open Stack

Great idea, Jay!

I was thinking we could do the "dirty dozen" and list all the most hated messages and prioritize them.  Game-ify it a bit and keep the top ten worst rolling as low hanging fruit bugs.  We keep the worst in the queue and as they get fixed, we mark another dead;-)

But, yeah, we've got to list them.  I've added a section to the bottom of the etherpad.  And I've moved Mathieu Gagne's to the first nomination for bad log messages.

Also, I will make sure they become bugs and post the links so folks can vote on the actual bug and add info/comments.

Also, thanks for the Wiki link.  I've been busy on other fires and was just getting to that.  I plan to expand the topic and include decisions we make, info from these discussions and old(and new) ML postings, etc.

Keep the suggestions coming.  And please don't be afraid to post to the etherpad.  I want to hear your pain.

More coming soon.
--Rocky


Mon, 06 Oct 2014 12:29:53 -0400
> From: Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com>
> To: openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-operators] Ops Meetup to return in Paris -
> 	your ideas wanted!
> Message-ID: <5432C381.2000404 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> 
> On 10/03/2014 03:07 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
> > Hey Tom and operators,
> >
> > Just wanted to say I volunteered to organize/drive the log
> > rationalization effort.  I'm glad to see it on the Operators'
> schedule
> > and added it to the working group schedule.  I should have more info
> out
> > and better organized by the summit. I've already got a volunteer or
> > two;-)  The etherpad I started is:
> >
> > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Log-Rationalization
> >
> > and I also put the link under the working group area of the Tom's
> etherpad.
> >
> > Please, everyone, I'm looking for:
> >
> > ?short term reduction of pain points (where would some focus on
> format,
> > content and/or levels during Kilo help the most?)
> >
> > ?Longer term: standards, automated verification through git review
> > (hacking, etc), review list additions, etc.
> >
> > ?Volunteers:  specifications, bugs, documentation, coding, repairing
> code
> >
> > And I want to say folks, I feel your pain.  I come from a QA and
> > operations background in large, mission critical, distributed systems
> > and logs have always been my best friends **and** the bane of my
> > existence when they don?t have what you need.  I get it.  I want to
> help
> > fix it.
> 
> I'm also looking forward to cleaning up the logging in OpenStack
> projects.
> 
> May I suggest on the etherpad that we take an approach of listing
> *specific* log messages that we (devs doing debugging and operators
> doing diagnostics/operations) find less than useful?
> 
> I think if we keep the etherpad focused on specific log messages, we
> can
> then start to identify:
> 
>   * changes to those log messages (structure, level, audience, payload,
> etc)
>   * log message "archetypes" that we can then use to generalize into
> best practice documentation on the wiki (to add to what is already
> there
> [1])
> 
> Does this sound like a reasonable approach?
> 
> -jay
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LoggingStandards
>