[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: debug.log

To: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: debug.log
From: Michael Holstein <michael.holstein@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 09:05:56 -0500
Delivered-to: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk-outgoing@seul.org
Delivered-to: or-talk@seul.org
Delivery-date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 09:06:22 -0500
In-reply-to: <740aba0c0603021556y7ca98195g17b1e9843949fc25@mail.gmail.com>
References: <740aba0c0603021514vd5fe6b6p253c616f2fbf6a02@mail.gmail.com> <20060302231938.GU31440@eecs.harvard.edu> <740aba0c0603021556y7ca98195g17b1e9843949fc25@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-or-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (X11/20040626)

Thanks, I thought that the debug level was only for errors. Would commenting out all the logging levels then cause no logging to occur at all? Is that probably the best way to run the tor server, or should I have some sort of error logging in place?

Debug is too verbose, and might include information that you wouldn't want to have around.

Doing normal logging (>warn) is fine .. only generates a few errors when people try dumb stuff like CONNECT:port against your DirPort, and when you have network writes that fail (although is scrubbs the address from those).

I run a fairly busy exit node, and my log only grows by 100k or so a day (which newsyslog can rotate around).

~Mike.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: debug.log
  - From: Agent0013

References:
- debug.log
  - From: Agent0013
- Re: debug.log
  - From: Geoffrey Goodell
- Re: debug.log
  - From: Agent0013

Prev by Author: Re: Is UDP anonymized via. TorDNS?
Next by Author: Re: insert mail
Previous by thread: Re: debug.log
Next by thread: Re: debug.log
Index(es):
- Author
- Thread