[Zope-dev] Logging for ZScheduler?

[Loren Stafford]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: zope-dev-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-dev-admin@zope.org]On Behalf
> Of Stuart 'Zen' Bishop
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 20:58
> To: Loren Stafford
>
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Loren Stafford wrote:
>
> > I need some advise for designing a flexible system for logging the
> > activities of scheduled events.
>
> You could just call Zope's logging system and move it out of the
> scope of your product. Have a look at zLOG.py or LOGGING.txt
> if you havn't already. Means people can extend their logging system
> to their hearts content with no effect on your product.

ZScheduler already uses zLOG.LOG. I guess I forgot that it permits
implementations other than stupid_log. So I guess ZScheduler is as flexible
as can be, given the current API.

>
> > But ZScheduler also needs to be ISP independent. That is, you
> should have
> > complete scheduling capabilities for your cohosted Zope
> applications without
> > having to call up the ISP and ask for system configuration changes.

> This could be achieved with a seperate product. A product that
> ties into Zope's logging infrastructure and allows viewing the
> log files through the web. All it would have to do is append itself to the
> ZLogger.loggers tuple, and the interface is pretty trivial. And of course,
> it means that other products can use it without modification
> (Logger product,
> Zope itself etc.) and can be extended as required without having to
> submit patches to you for inclusion in ZScheduler.

Aha! Even tho a cohosted account might not be able to modify the source of
the Zope implementation directly, installing a CustomLog product could do so
indirectly, by importing ZLogger and modifying the loggers tuple. To know
where to write the log file, CustomLog would have to either know or be
configurable enough to adapt to the ISP's Zope configuration. I suppose an
absolute path property would be suffient. An ISP could preconfigure and
preinstall the CustomLog product for all users, or each user could do it.

>
> It would be a good idea if there was a field in the ZEvent that defined
> the subsystem used in the zLOG call.
>

I didn't follow your point here. By "subsytem" do you mean which logger in
the loggers tuple? Then do you mean that different ZEvents could log to
different loggers? Why would this be a "good idea", I mean, do you have a
use case in mind?

-- Thanks
-- Loren