qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alan Conway <acon...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r616404 - /incubator/qpid/trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/client/Connector.cpp
Date Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:35:53 GMT
Gordon Sim wrote:
> aconway@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: aconway
>> Date: Tue Jan 29 07:49:55 2008
>> New Revision: 616404
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=616404&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Log peer address with SEND/RECV messages.
>>
> 
>> -    QPID_LOG(trace, "SENT [" << this << "]: " << frame);
>> +    QPID_LOG(trace, "SENT (" << aio->getSocket().getPeerAddress() <<

>> "): " << frame);
> 
> While I agree that the peer address is more informative, it doesn't help 
> distinguish between multiple connections in an application to the same 
> broker.
> 
> Adding the local address would help this, but might add a bit too much 
> noise to every log entry. Either that could be cut back to be just the 
> local port or we could keep using this in the log entries and log both 
> local and remote addresses once when the connection is established.
> 
> Thoughts?

Adding just the local port is probably the best solution. It has the 
added advantage that it allows you to easily correlate frames on client 
and server since both will contain the client's port number. Something 
like: (127.0.0.1:5672 59007)

Using a pointer makes the logs hard to process with grep and the like, 
since you can't interpret a log line in isolation, you have to go back 
and find the original connect line (and you have to still *have* the 
original connect line)

Mime
View raw message