BIND 10 #2180: Warn administrator when creating an empty SQLite data source
BIND 10 Development
do-not-reply at isc.org
Thu Aug 30 08:09:57 UTC 2012
#2180: Warn administrator when creating an empty SQLite data source
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: shane | Owner: jinmei
Type: | Status: reviewing
defect | Milestone:
Priority: | Sprint-20120904
medium | Resolution:
Component: | Sensitive: 0
Unclassified | Sub-Project: DNS
Keywords: | Estimated Difficulty: 4
Defect Severity: | Total Hours: 0
Medium |
Feature Depending on Ticket: |
Add Hours to Ticket: 0 |
Internal?: 0 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jinmei):
Replying to [comment:8 vorner]:
Okay. I do not necessarily agree with all points, but I won't
strongly oppose to them either. Please feel free to merge.
> Replying to [comment:6 jinmei]:
> > I've made one small editorial change.
>
> Did you push it? I can't find it.
>
> > Personally, I'd like to keep the log level INFO; I don't like to use a
> > higher level of logs (especially warn and error) unless the event
> > should generally be considered abnormal. Since INFO is the default
> > log level, this event will still be logged by default, and, my
> > understanding of our discussion of this ticket, the important part is
> > to include the path to the DB file in the log so that such stupid!^w
> > poor administrators will easily notice what's wrong when something is
> > wrong, rather than by raising the log level.
>
> Actually, I believe the original purpose of the ticket was to raise the
log level and the path is just a nice extra. It was based on real
experience, it took Shane a long time to find the message in the logs,
since there are many INFO messages.
>
> And I actually believe WARN is justified here. Creating a new database
file is really abnormal situation, you don't do that during the normal
operation. You do it once on the first startup and that it is.
>
> > Another point: I'd rather just remove DATASRC_SQLITE_SETUP_OLD_API
> > than revising it as a separate message ID, because we'll soon remove
> > the .cc anyway, and then this new ID will be dangling.
>
> Well, there'll be many dangling message IDs we'll need to find after
that. One more or less is not much of a problem. And I don't like to keep
the code in some degrading state just because we plan to remove it Really
Soon Now (which, I think, we plan to do for like around a year).
>
> With regards.
--
Ticket URL: <https://bind10.isc.org/ticket/2180#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development
More information about the bind10-tickets
mailing list