3 ms·
Our logging is tied to our monitoring system. So for us, it is: DEBUG - throw it away INFO - put it in a log file WARNING - put it on a dashboard ERROR - pu
by twic 3y ago
Our logging is tied to our monitoring system. So for us, it is:
DEBUG - throw it away
INFO - put it in a log file
WARNING - put it on a dashboard
ERROR - put it in PagerDuty
This does make it very easy to decide on the level. Do i want to be woken up at five in the morning for this? No? Then it's definitely not ERROR!
- marcosdumay 3y agoWell, then I'd say ERROR is a very bad name. Because it's a well defined word with a precise meaning. If you tell somebody "an error happened here" they will have no trouble understanding it, and what they understand won't be "we need to wake up somebody to deal with this NOW!". Those names are proof that your logging structure was created for debugging, not for production.
- twic 3y agoI'm afraid this is an entirely fantastical objection. I don't believe we have ever had the confusion you describe, and this structure was created entirely for production use.
- Supermancho 3y ago> Well, then I'd say ERROR is a very bad name. The name is irrelevant. The issue being addressed is a poor assertion. Log levels are not meaningless in a standardized system. It's trivial to map a set of levels to a useful set of conditions. Like any monitoring (or logging), the system has to be well-regulated and maintained to be useful. In good faith, log levels are useful.