[ZBXNEXT-2854] Add information for log_level_increase area when needing to debug issue. Created: 2015 Jun 20 Updated: 2015 Jun 21 Resolved: 2015 Jun 21 |
|
Status: | Closed |
Project: | ZABBIX FEATURE REQUESTS |
Component/s: | Documentation (D) |
Affects Version/s: | 2.4.5 |
Fix Version/s: | None |
Type: | Change Request | Priority: | Trivial |
Reporter: | Yannick Moussette | Assignee: | Unassigned |
Resolution: | Won't fix | Votes: | 0 |
Labels: | logging, runtimecontrol | ||
Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
Environment: |
N/A, online documentation |
Description |
Would it be possible to add a zabbix process association in the Documentation, in order to help us know which Zabbix_Process we need to increase the log-level for debugging. For example, a one-line in Zabbix-Agent items may indicate that if you need to enable debugging fot this item in the log file, then you need to increase the logging for the "Polling" zabbix process. Under Zabbix-Agent(Active), you would need to log the "Trapper" process Under Discovery, Need to log the "Discovery" process, but does not include the "LLD" discoveries, need to enable "Poller" or "Trapper" for those. Under External Scripts --> Poller etc, etc.. The issues I have when debugging is that I'm often not sure I'm even increasing the logging for what I need to debug. Thank you! Gleepwurp. |
Comments |
Comment by richlv [ 2015 Jun 21 ] |
hmm, not sure this is easily possible. it is complicated enough not to fit into the manual neatly - for example, the examples mentioned only deal with data retrieval, but data might not end up where expected or not when expected for other reasons, too - db syncers or other processes might be involved. as another example, the mentioned network discovery would also depend on icmp pingers, ipmi pollers... this seems more like material for a blog article, only touching on some areas or maybe a wiki article on https://zabbix.org - maybe you want to start one ? |
Comment by Yannick Moussette [ 2015 Jun 21 ] |
I see what you mean, makes sense.... Yeah, let me see what I have already and I'll start a wiki article on it.... maybe folks with experience can add to it... G. |
Comment by richlv [ 2015 Jun 21 ] |
thanks - let's close this issue for now and continue discussion on this on irc etc. actually, i just spotted incorrect info that i mentioned earlier - in discovery, it would be just the discoverer processes, involved in the discovery, not all of those poller types... edit : but that shows why it is crucial to never say just "discovery" - always be specific whether it's "network discovery", "low level discovery" or "active agent auto-registration" |
Comment by Yannick Moussette [ 2015 Jun 21 ] |
Agreed, I have often times enabled "discovery" for the LLD, only to realize after watching the logs that I didn't even enable the proper area to debug.. Which is kind of what prompted me to ask if we could document it somewhere... I'll make sure to make the proper distinction in the wiki article. G. |