From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <g.goller@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D204F587 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:09:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 15E301F776 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:09:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:09:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BB74744754 for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:09:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <b981c430-9b17-38b3-f054-b2d17d0e7a5c@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 13:09:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>, Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> Cc: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> References: <20230821111938.110298-1-g.goller@proxmox.com> <cf4369be-147c-46a9-a332-6b3cbb18f500@proxmox.com> <jafju2ed6q5kuktplrslu6jde3aznhovy6yc7cwdifzdsl6h3v@25okbn7av7yr> From: Gabriel Goller <g.goller@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <jafju2ed6q5kuktplrslu6jde3aznhovy6yc7cwdifzdsl6h3v@25okbn7av7yr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.356 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -1.473 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] api: Outsource the logger initialization to the router X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion <pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>, <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 11:09:17 -0000 On 9/29/23 11:49, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 11:35:06AM +0200, Dominik Csapak wrote: >> [..] > On the one hand `proxmox-router` is used for both the API daemons and by > our schema-based CLI parser, and we already have `cli::init_cli_logger` > in there. > On the other hand, there's no guarantee that all daemons will use this > crate, if they don't need any schema/CLI parsing, but then again this > can still be initialized specially there... > > Basically, I don't specifically object to having a common helper for > a "this is how our daemons usually do logging" type of deal, but it may > still make more sense in proxmox-rest-server. I agree, it does more sense in the proxmox-rest-server crate. > Regardless of where we put it, for our log refactoring, we'd need this > to return a logger instance, rather than actually setting the logger, > because our API daemons will need a *custom* logger to deal with the > workers, which in turn needs access to the logger created *here*. Yeah, we can do that, we will just have to return the `syslog::BasicLogger` and call `log::set_boxed_logger(..)` in the api/proxy `run()` function. Should we also return the max_log_level somehow, maybe in a tupel? Currently I am already setting it in the `init_syslog_logger` function using log::set_max_loglevel(..)`. > The custom logger would then definitely go into `proxmox-rest-server`, > so the syslog portion may as well live there, depending on which we'd > consider more "consistent" with the CLI portion being in > `proxmox-router` - the CLI tools definitely won't want to pull in > `proxmox-rest-server`, so moving the cli logger setup there doesn't make > sense.