Ceki,
Thank You for you feedback and suggestions. There are plenty of ways to design out the log4j classes. A full design and analysis would probably not fit into article of this nature. I would definitely put more design in each aspect of a logging architecture. I wanted to point out the benefit of logging with JMS, how to implement it with the tools, and showing how the technologies integrate. Roland Barcia IBM Software Services for Websphere [EMAIL PROTECTED] 201-869-9630 cell-201-519-8010 Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/22/2002 07:25:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Roland Barcia/Paramus/IBM@IBMUS Subject: Article on JMS logging Curiously enough, while preparing the JMSAppender section in my book "the complete log4j manual," I came across the following article entitled "Develop an Asynchronous Logging Framework using log4j with JMS and WebSphere MQ". Here is the link: http://www7b.software.ibm.com/wsdd/library/techarticles/0207_barcia/barcia.html It touches on the problem of caching connections/sessions and proposes a solution. The way com.ibm.logdemo.message.LOGXMLMessage objects are transformed is interesting as an anti-pattern. The com.ibm.logdemo.appender.LogClass employs a classical log4j anti-pattern by calling Category.getInstance() for each log operation. I don't understand why the author did not just use XMLLayout. The author writes: For this example, we will create a small custom XML type layout to demonstrate how log4j message formats may be customized. The intent here is not to show XML best practices, just log4j functionality. But I still don't get it. In any case, it is certainly worthwhile reading for those interested in JMS logging. -- Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
