Getting Data In

/etc/datetime.xml priority timestamp patch / configuration file precedence

splunkreal
Influencer

Hello,

regarding https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/8.2.2/ReleaseNotes/FixDatetimexml2020 - in case we upgrade Splunk version does /etc/datetime.xml is still less priority than pushed patch app on shc/idxc/UFs ?

Looking at https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/8.2.2/Admin/Wheretofindtheconfigurationfiles I may understand /etc is lowest priority?

How do you handle it if you keep V7 universal forwarders and upgrade servers to 8.2.2 version?

Thanks.

* If this helps, please upvote or accept solution if it solved *
0 Karma
1 Solution

splunkreal
Influencer

Support : "the new version of Splunk includes the new parameters, so the workaround are not longer needed if your indexers and HF are running Splunk 8.X, and as I told you before, only the Indexers and HF can do parsing, so that also means that the parameter is not needed in the Universal Forwarders."

* If this helps, please upvote or accept solution if it solved *

View solution in original post

0 Karma

richgalloway
SplunkTrust
SplunkTrust

If you are running a version of Splunk with the patch then there is no need to update datetime.xml.

The /etc directory is not part of the configuration file precedence order.  $SPLUNK_HOME/etc/system/default is the lowest-priority directory.

Just do it, but bear in mind the 7.x UFs will be unsupported soon.

---
If this reply helps you, Karma would be appreciated.
0 Karma

splunkreal
Influencer

Hi Rich,

 Looks like datetime.xml in 8.2.2 is different than in patch.

V4 xml:
<define name="_utcepoch" extract="utcepoch, subsecond">
<!-- update regex before '2023' -->
<text><![CDATA[((?<=^|[\s#,"=\(\[\|\{])(?:1[0123456]|9)\d{8}|^@[\da-fA-F]{16,24})(?:\.?(\d{1,6}))?(?![\d\(])]]></text>
</define>

V5 xml:
<define name="_utcepoch" extract="utcepoch, subsecond">
<!-- update regex before '2030' -->
<text><![CDATA[((?<=^|[\s#,"=\(\[\|\{])(?:1[012345678])\d{8}|^@[\da-fA-F]{16,24})(?:\.?(\d{1,6}))?(?![\d\(])]]></text>
</define>

 

* If this helps, please upvote or accept solution if it solved *
0 Karma

richgalloway
SplunkTrust
SplunkTrust

Use the newer one.

---
If this reply helps you, Karma would be appreciated.

splunkreal
Influencer

Support : "the new version of Splunk includes the new parameters, so the workaround are not longer needed if your indexers and HF are running Splunk 8.X, and as I told you before, only the Indexers and HF can do parsing, so that also means that the parameter is not needed in the Universal Forwarders."

* If this helps, please upvote or accept solution if it solved *
0 Karma
Got questions? Get answers!

Join the Splunk Community Slack to learn, troubleshoot, and make connections with fellow Splunk practitioners in real time!

Meet up IRL or virtually!

Join Splunk User Groups to connect and learn in-person by region or remotely by topic or industry.

Get Updates on the Splunk Community!

Data Management Digest – May 2026

Welcome to the May 2026 edition of Data Management Digest!   As your trusted partner in data innovation, the ...

Index This | What is feather-light but cannot be held long?

May 2026 Edition  Hayyy Splunk Education Enthusiasts and the Eternally Curious!   We’re back with this ...

.conf26 Registration is Live: Secure Your Early Bird Pass Now

  Lock in Your Spot: Registration Open for .conf26 in Denver Hello Splunkers, I have exciting news! Your ...