Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revert "[docker-base]: Rate limit priority INFO and lower in syslog" #5763

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2020

Conversation

theasianpianist
Copy link
Contributor

Reverts #5666

Since sonic-net/sonic-sairedis#680 has been merged, this is no longer necessary.

@jleveque
Copy link
Contributor

Are we sure we don't want to keep this change? If some other info-level log message starts spamming, we could rate-limit and lose more important messages, correct?

Or should we revert it for now and keep it in our back pocket in case we decide it's needed in the future?

@lguohan
Copy link
Collaborator

lguohan commented Oct 31, 2020

retest this baseimage please

@lguohan
Copy link
Collaborator

lguohan commented Oct 31, 2020

retest baseimage please

@theasianpianist
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jleveque We've only been seeing this rate limiting from orchagent, and the default log level for that is NOTICE anyways. I'd say it's better to revert now but keep this in our back pocket like you said.

@theasianpianist theasianpianist merged commit 10ab46f into master Nov 2, 2020
@theasianpianist theasianpianist deleted the revert-5666-log-rate-limit branch November 2, 2020 16:49
santhosh-kt pushed a commit to santhosh-kt/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2021
…onic-net#5763)

* This was a temporary fix for orchagent spamming log messages and causing rate limiting, leading to critical messages being dropped for the syslog. No longer needed since sonic-net/sonic-sairedis#680 was merged.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants