[Nut-upsdev] [nut-commits] svn commit r1846 - in trunk: . clients common drivers include man server
Arjen de Korte
nut+devel at de-korte.org
Tue May 26 07:13:32 UTC 2009
Citeren Daniel O'Connor <doconnor op gsoft.com.au>:
> <shrugs> seems silly to go to extra effort to generate relative time
> stamps (save when you start, gettod & subtract for each log) when you
> can trivially generate absolute ones which allow you to reference any
> other event on your system be it another NUT daemon or not.
> What advantage do relative timestamps have?
It is much easier to see how much time is spend and therefor, find the
place where timeouts occur (which causes the vast majority of
problems). We humans have a much harder time to calculate the
difference between nine figure numerals, than for two to three
figures, so therefor I prefer relative time.
Most problems where timestamps are useful will happen in the first few
seconds after starting (trust me on that, being involved in NUT for so
long). For anything that happens only occasionally, we'll have to rely
on upslog() anyway, since we can't expect people to run programs in
debug mode all the time. The amount of data to weed through would be
Best regards, Arjen
Please keep list traffic on the list
More information about the Nut-upsdev