Open tomsommer opened 7 years ago
I wonder if we should just remove the ISO8601
shorthand. It confuses a lot of folks.
I recommend you use the format you provided instead of the ISO8601
shorthand.
The formats the ISO8601
shorthand supports are these:
Adding more will likely add latency (every format failure incurs a cost and wasted resources) -- so my recommendation remains that you be specific with your format and use the one you provided.
Duly noted, it is indeed confusing that ISO8601
is apparently so loose, and/or open to interpretation.
Filed https://github.com/logstash-plugins/logstash-filter-date/issues/109 to discuss removing the confusing iso8601 keyword.
"ISO8601" doesn't support this format provided by Apache HTTPD:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/core.html#errorlogformat
returns
2017-10-02 16:10:52.118921
(example)Format is
yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSSSSS