2 ms·
Logs are typically fairly unstructured and complex to parse. For whitebox monitoring (i.e. where you have access to the code and the code can report state) you
by apposite 12y ago
Logs are typically fairly unstructured and complex to parse. For whitebox monitoring (i.e. where you have access to the code and the code can report state) you are far better off exporting state in a very well defined format to minimise parsing overhead. It also tends to make you a bit more focused on defining the characteristics of the parameter you are monitoring.
You want blackbox monitoring (for close-to-user experience) AND whitebox monitoring (which provide diagnostics of internal state for debugging). True blackbox monitoring is often pretty unreliable so you are usually better of alerting on whitebox reported state of end user perceivable variables, e.g. HTTP error codes, latency and so on.
State of the art is to report a staggering amount of data about the internal state of a server. I mean a lot. 10s to 100s of times the number of parameters you are probably used to seeing.
- Rapzid 12y agoTypically yes. But I'm predicting a huge shift towards structured logging. Take a look at Serilog. It's a .Net logger I've been using recently that just has some fantastic concepts. Worth reading into even if you don't use .Net . I believe that's the direction "logging" will go... It's more eventing now I guess. Both metrics and "logs" can be expressed as events. Those are like points in space. An incident could be like a line; a 2d event with a start and duration.