Topics

Support-Logging Mongo Configuration

Trevor.Conn@...
 

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential

I have a question for the community –

 

I’m working on the ConfigV2 changes for the support-logging service and in its configuration for Mongo, it has an anomalous property for MongoCollection. This is in addition to the database name signified by the MongoDB property. These are currently set as follows:

 

MongoDB = 'logging' #DBName

MongoCollection = 'logEntry' #Collection within the above DB

 

No other service specifies a collection in addition to the database name, instead choosing to just write all documents into the specified database. Indeed having a collection called “logEntry” inside of a “logging” database sounds redundant to me.

 

ConfigV2 has the following structure for specifying database configuration settings:

[Databases]
  [Databases.Primary]
  Host = 'localhost'
  Name = 'coredata'
  Password = ''
  Port = 27017
  Username = ''
  Timeout = 5000
  Type = 'mongodb'

 

I would like to standardize on this by removing the need for a MongoCollection from the support-logging configuration. Are there any objections?

 

Trevor Conn

Senior Principal Software Engineer

Dell Technologies | IoT DellTech

Trevor.Conn@...

Round Rock, TX USA

 

Joan Duran
 

In the other microservices (core-data, core-metada and core-client) the collection names used by MongoDB are defined in internal/pkg/db/db.go.

As you said, should be fine to remove this parameter and add a const (LogCollection?) in internal/pkg/db/db.go file.

Best regards,
Joan


El 26/09/18 a les 23:48, Trevor.Conn@... ha escrit:

Dell - Internal Use - Confidential

I have a question for the community –

 

I’m working on the ConfigV2 changes for the support-logging service and in its configuration for Mongo, it has an anomalous property for MongoCollection. This is in addition to the database name signified by the MongoDB property. These are currently set as follows:

 

MongoDB = 'logging' #DBName

MongoCollection = 'logEntry' #Collection within the above DB

 

No other service specifies a collection in addition to the database name, instead choosing to just write all documents into the specified database. Indeed having a collection called “logEntry” inside of a “logging” database sounds redundant to me.

 

ConfigV2 has the following structure for specifying database configuration settings:

[Databases]
  [Databases.Primary]
  Host = 'localhost'
  Name = 'coredata'
  Password = ''
  Port = 27017
  Username = ''
  Timeout = 5000
  Type = 'mongodb'

 

I would like to standardize on this by removing the need for a MongoCollection from the support-logging configuration. Are there any objections?

 

Trevor Conn

Senior Principal Software Engineer

Dell Technologies | IoT DellTech

Trevor.Conn@...

Round Rock, TX USA