Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Apr 24, 2019. It is now read-only.

Set trace level to info #248

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Set trace level to info #248

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

betzw
Copy link
Contributor

@betzw betzw commented May 16, 2017

Description

@SeppoTakalo should improve situation for issue #247.

@betzw
Copy link
Contributor Author

betzw commented Jun 1, 2017

Can someone pls. let me know why several of the checks are failing (seems as if I have no access to the Details)?

@SeppoTakalo
Copy link
Contributor

Due the security reasons, some of our CI jobs don't execute tests from pull requests coming outside of these repositories. Therefore they fail.

Somebody from Client team should review this and replicate the PR into a local branch. @yogpan01 @teetak01 can you help on this?

@teetak01
Copy link
Contributor

teetak01 commented Jun 1, 2017

Well, the PR itself is fine, but is this really the right way to "fix" this? There seems to an issue that the mesh cannot handle the activity. This is only hiding it.

@betzw
Copy link
Contributor Author

betzw commented Jun 1, 2017

Don't think that there is a way to fix this issue as it basically is a timing issue which is caused by the huge amount of debug messages when using trace level debug.
On the other hand, setting the trace level to info would allow users to be able to see what's going on in the stack while still having working connections.

@teetak01
Copy link
Contributor

teetak01 commented Jun 1, 2017

Could same kind of delays be caused if the application is doing some heavy processing (like TLS operations) or some heavy customer application decoding?

@betzw
Copy link
Contributor Author

betzw commented Jun 5, 2017

In theory yes, but it must be very heavy processing ... I mean producing debug output over printf and the like is so time consuming because it typically is implemented in polling mode, i.e. busy waiting for each character to be sent over the serial line, inhibiting any other kind of processing to proceed.

@JanneKiiskila
Copy link
Contributor

Is there a conclusion on this? @yogpan01 @SeppoTakalo

@betzw
Copy link
Contributor Author

betzw commented Jul 3, 2017

As far as I know, not really.
What I can add is that this would have been very helpful while we worked on #266.

@teetak01
Copy link
Contributor

Part of #327 already.

@teetak01 teetak01 closed this Nov 16, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants