Hi there,
it would be nice to see the batch file name in the log files,
so I can see which batch refers to the log file.
So, can you please write the batch file name into one of the
first lines of the sync log?
regards,
fred
Batch file name in log files
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 18 Dec 2009
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7049
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
What about using a distinct log-directory for each batch job? This has both
the advantage that it's then easy to associate logfiles and batchjobs as well
as that it's already implemented.
the advantage that it's then easy to associate logfiles and batchjobs as well
as that it's already implemented.
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 18 Dec 2009
Hello,
the implementation on your side would only be one 'print' line,
breaking nothing :)
But it is a nice idea anyway, so I will adopt my batches and
ffs jobs accordingly. Another positive effect will be, that one
can see the size change of the log for a distinct job more clearly,
telling something about what has happened. Talking about this,
what do you think about writing some statistics to the end of
the log, like items created/replaced/deleted?
I do not want to force releases, it's just popping to my mind.
Whenever it comes, it might be helpful.
regards,
fred
the implementation on your side would only be one 'print' line,
breaking nothing :)
But it is a nice idea anyway, so I will adopt my batches and
ffs jobs accordingly. Another positive effect will be, that one
can see the size change of the log for a distinct job more clearly,
telling something about what has happened. Talking about this,
what do you think about writing some statistics to the end of
the log, like items created/replaced/deleted?
I do not want to force releases, it's just popping to my mind.
Whenever it comes, it might be helpful.
regards,
fred
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7049
- Joined: 9 Dec 2007
> the implementation on your side would only be one 'print' line, breaking
nothing :)
Allright, the solution I suggested fulfills the requirement, but imposes a
(small) constraint, namely requiring the user to create a folder structure for
each batchfile. Having the filename within each logfile *feels* kind of
displaced, as it has two semantics "filename and name of syncjob". Within a
logfile I'd expect a name of the syncjob, not a filename. Secondly it
(slightly) bloats the logfile with not so important information. But there's a
third solution which I'm going to implement for v3.4: Prefix the logfile name
with the name of the batch file. This seems to be the right information at the
right level.
>what do you think about writing some statistics to the end of the log, like
items created/replaced/deleted?
Generally I think it's redundant, because each sync-event is logged as a
separate line and there is no functional benefit (other than satisfying
curiosity to some degree). In this case I'd prefer a "quality" of information
over "quantity", meaning, that the log should only contain what's really
necessary/informative.
nothing :)
Allright, the solution I suggested fulfills the requirement, but imposes a
(small) constraint, namely requiring the user to create a folder structure for
each batchfile. Having the filename within each logfile *feels* kind of
displaced, as it has two semantics "filename and name of syncjob". Within a
logfile I'd expect a name of the syncjob, not a filename. Secondly it
(slightly) bloats the logfile with not so important information. But there's a
third solution which I'm going to implement for v3.4: Prefix the logfile name
with the name of the batch file. This seems to be the right information at the
right level.
>what do you think about writing some statistics to the end of the log, like
items created/replaced/deleted?
Generally I think it's redundant, because each sync-event is logged as a
separate line and there is no functional benefit (other than satisfying
curiosity to some degree). In this case I'd prefer a "quality" of information
over "quantity", meaning, that the log should only contain what's really
necessary/informative.
