Archive

props.conf

Builder

I just create a new sourcetype and was wondering what makes up this text file? I see

[SplunkServerLocal]
NOBINARYCHECK = 1
pulldown_type = 1

What does Nobianarycheck? pulldown_type mean?

Tags (1)
0 Karma

Engager

to put it simple
NOBINARYCHECK=FALSE - will check for binaries
we usally set to true since we ingest raw files

0 Karma

Path Finder

I am looking at same attribute and in 15 minutes cannot get it whether it is me or Splunk's missing sense as it is not the first time.

When I see NO_ I expect behaviour as Do Not and if =true then Do Not !!!
but Specs file at /README/ says "* When set to true, Splunk software processes binary files."

so I am confused as it is two contrary statements .

0 Karma

Path Finder

If set to true, it will not check whether the file is binary OR not. It will just process it.
However if set to false it will check whether the file is binary or not. And if it's binary, Not to process the same.

It's like, (-)(-) = (+).

Hope you understand.

0 Karma

Legend

This is covered in the docs.

NO_BINARY_CHECK = [true|false]
* When set to true, Splunk processes binary files.
* Can only be used on the basis of [<sourcetype>], or [source::<source>], not [host::<host>].
* Defaults to false (binary files are ignored).

pulldown_type = <bool>
* Internal field used for user-interface control of source types.
* Defaults to empty.

http://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/latest/admin/Propsconf

Path Finder

@abwc, it's saying "no" as in "don't perform the check seeing if the file is binary or not. Attempt to index it no matter what."

0 Karma

Engager

I'm here today, trying to answer the question "is the props.conf help file wording wrong here, or am I misunderstanding some double-negatives ?"

NOBINARYCHECK: is this the negative of BINARY_CHECK ?

What is the meaning of "NO_" here ? Is this 'NO' as in "DON'T" ?

If so, then setting this to TRUE should mean Splunk does NOT process binary files.

But the clarifying bullets indicate the opposite.

So who is getting tripped-up in double-negatives here, me ?... or is it Splunk ?!...