[Nut-upsdev] [nut-commits] svn commit r1846 - in trunk: . clients common drivers include man server

[Arjen de Korte]

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  
overwhelming also.

Best regards, Arjen
-- 
Please keep list traffic on the list