Understanding the timestamp of ltrace

[Pavel Kazlenka]

Hi Franck,

Sorry for obvious action, but could you check unix file 
permissions/owners for log files? If you e.g. scp'ed server logs to 
client machine there is a chance that user running polygraph-ltrace 
really have no permission to read *.log file.

Best wishes,
Pavel

On 07/17/2013 07:43 PM, Franck Youssef wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
>>> Furthermore, when printing the 'time' object using --time_unit 1s, I obtain some kind of a funny timestamp prefixed with a dash: "-2147483620.50"  (= Fri Dec 13 21:46:19 MET 1901 using date -d @…).
>> This seems like a bug. What polygraph version do you use?
> I am using the latest public stable release (a.k.a. v. 4.3.2).
> Using polygraph-lr, the timing is correct. However, they are false with polygraph-ltrace.
>
>> You could modify sampling interval using '--win_len' option. Do not use '--time_unit' option if you want unix timestamps.
>> e.g.
>> $ polygraph-ltrace --objects time, err_xact.count --win_len 20sec <lo
> Thanks! This works like a charm!
>
> Furthermore, I experience issues when inspecting logs from multiple clients and servers hosts.
> When running
> $ polygraph-ltrace --object err_xact.count --side all *.log
>
> I obtain the following errors:
> server1.log:warning: failed to read log file, skipping
> server2.log:warning: failed to read log file, skipping
> … for all the servers logs
> followed by the "normal" ltrace output based on the clients logs only.
>
> Whey running the same command on the server logs only, the trace is correct and no warnings are issued. It works also correctly with client logs only.
> However, when starting to mix client and server logs together, I obtain again warnings on STDERR.
>
> The error happens on any --side all|clt|srv and --sync_times 0|1 combination.
> Also possibly related, when using polygraph-reporter on the same logs, the polygraph-reporter app gets killed after passing to server-side plots. The crash does not happen with client logs only.
>
> Is that also a bug, or am I misunderstanding the logging mechanism?
>
>
> Thank you a lot for your explanations.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Franck