Inline...
-------Original Message-----
--From: Werner Guttmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 4:28 AM
--To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--Subject: Re: [castor-dev] A couple of questions.
--
--
--Nick,
--
--please see inline for comments ...
--
--Werner
--
--On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:49:14 -0400, Nick Stuart wrote:
--
-->Hello all. I just have a couple of questions on why things are like
-->they are with the latest castor(cvs).
-->
-->First up is the logging. Is the main logging mechanism
--supposed to be
-->commons-logging or log4j? Or do they act together to provide to
-->different functionalities?
--
--Well, the prefered logging package as Jakarta Common's
--Logging package, as it provides a nice and well-designed
--abstraction layer on top of various logging packages, incl. log4j.
Got ya. So does commons actually use log4j and is just a nicer layer to
work with?
Or is it completely different?
-->Also, I noticed that the log4j package was not included with castor.
-->Any reason for this? (license issue, bloat,
-->etc...)
--
--Nick, it actually is. In the lib directory, you'll find both
--common-logging.jar and log4j-1.2.8.jar ... iow, both are there.
You're right, must have been smoking something then and just missed it.
--
-->I found that with out the log4j package I wasn't getting
--nearly enough
-->logging, and I had no way to define the detail of logging,
--no log4j =
-->no log4j.properties file.
-->
-->Also, for the class path of the jar file. Any reason we
--can't put the
-->required jar files in the castor manifest so it finds them
--with out the
-->application programmer needing to add these in their own classpath.
-->They are required after all so why not code them in?
--Well, there's a manifest file in the CVS repository. I guess
--it just takes updating it ... do you mind creating an
--enhancement request for this, pretty please ?
Enhancement requested. :)
--
-->I also noticed with the latest cvs an issue with the default
--cache type.
-->I thought it was supposed to be count-limited with a count
--of 100, but
-->it defiantly not. I'm not sure what it was set to but if I
--was getting
-->expired objects with only 1-5 objects in the cache. Changing
--the type
-->manually to cache-type with 30 count fixed the problem, and acted as
-->expected.
--
--Mea culpa. As part of reworking the performance caches, I got
--some code wrong. I just checked in some updates to
--CacheRegistry.java yesterday that should take care of this
--problem. This patch has been sitting on my home machine for
--quite some time now, but apparently didn't make it into the
--repository.
That's what I figured, knew this area has undergone a lot of work
recently.
--
-->I guess that's all for now. :)
-->
-->Nick Stuart
-->Computer Systems Analyst
-->
-->Vortechnics, Inc.
-->200 Enterprise Drive
-->Scarborough, Maine 04074
-->
-->
--
--
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
--If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
-- unsubscribe castor-dev
--
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
