Is simplestreams spam worth having in the Log

[Michael Foord]

On 01/04/15 11:47, John Meinel wrote:
> I've been noticing lately that everytime a test fails it ends up 
> having a *lot* of lines about failing to find simplestreams headers. 
> (this last test failure had about 200 long lines of that, and only 6 
> lines of actual failure message that was useful).
>
> Now I think there are a few things to look at here:
>
> 1) The lines about "looking for any" double up and occur 9 times. Why 
> are we repeating the search for tools 9 times in 
> "TestUpgradeCharmDir"? maybe its genuine, but it sure feels like we're 
> doing work over and over again that could be done once.
>
> 2) We still default to reporting every failed index.json lookup, and 
> *not* reporting the one that succeeded. Now these are at DEBUG level, 
> but I have the feeling their utility is low enough that we should 
> actually switch them to TRACE and *start* logging the one we 
> successfully found at DEBUG level.
>
> Thoughts?
>

Oh god, please reduce log spam where you can! Trawling through logs for 
actual failure reasons is the bane of my life (and probably everyone 
else's)!

Michael

> John
> =:->
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20150401/164bcd72/attachment.html>