From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B8821FF0B7 for ; Fri, 02 Oct 2026 12:01:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EF34921690; Fri, 02 Oct 2026 12:01:00 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 12:00:57 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [RFC datacenter-manager/proxmox v2 0/4] log: allow finegrained control logging levels From: "Thomas Ellmenreich" To: "Lukas Wagner" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20260923115815.211083-1-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1790935257389 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.485 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: 5DQMKUQGBFFBFANJMNPOXTLBEF5DIWQ2 X-Message-ID-Hash: 5DQMKUQGBFFBFANJMNPOXTLBEF5DIWQ2 X-MailFrom: t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri Oct 2, 2026 at 11:44 AM CEST, Lukas Wagner wrote: > On Fri Oct 2, 2026 at 11:34 AM CEST, Thomas Ellmenreich wrote: >> Thank you very much for your review. I will address the changes in the >> next version. I have one question below: >> >> On Fri Oct 2, 2026 at 10:10 AM CEST, Lukas Wagner wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>>> - Initially, I found case 3. of the different logging cases quite conf= using and >>>> would have thought that our 'default_log_level' should apply as defa= ult in >>>> that case. Unfortunately, when setting 'default_log_level' and then = applying >>>> the EnvFilter string, tracing applies the modules as expected, but t= hen also >>>> overrides the default as '', which means off. >>> >>> Indeed a bit confusing, but since this is (mostly) a >>> developer/supporter feature, as long at this behavior is documented >>> somewhere, it should be manageable. >> >> Since you mentioned it, should I add some documentation somewhere >> explaining how to use these env filters? If so, where would be the best >> place for it? > > Since as I mentioned this is (mostly) a developer-feature, I think adding > a small section about it in the 'dev-docs' (this is a folder in the PDM > repo) would be a good start. > > It of course still could also make sense to mention in the user-facing > product documentation, but as we have briefly discussed off-list, module > paths are inherently unstable, so it's somewhat pointless to provide > examples there. Familiarity with the code structure is required to > properly use this feature. Yes, I totally understand. I was also thinking of adding it to the develope= r focus documentation for the reasons you mentioned. > So for now, I'd just add it as developer documentation. > > I've noticed that PDM and PBS use different conventions for the > environment variable, in PDM we use PROXMOX_DEBUG, while in PBS we use > PBS_LOG -- maybe that's also something where we should find a common > style to use. Just thinking out aloud here, no need to touch this as > part of this series, of course. I was actually wondering about this when creating the series. In my mind, a= ll log level variables should end with '_LOG', but we can't really replace 'PROXMOX_DEBUG' since it is already in use. Could we also support a 'PDM_LO= G' variable alongside it, and then first deprecate and later remove the old on= e? (Not for this series, but just as a thought) >> >> [snip]