LOG4J2-1179 update Async Loggers page: removed table with Location performance results, link to performance page
Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/repo Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/commit/d4866b0c Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/tree/d4866b0c Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/diff/d4866b0c Branch: refs/heads/master Commit: d4866b0c2b9737ee1792372a4d83ee1ac02a0a69 Parents: d2c7484 Author: rpopma <[email protected]> Authored: Sat May 7 23:48:04 2016 +0900 Committer: rpopma <[email protected]> Committed: Sat May 7 23:48:04 2016 +0900 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml | 52 ++----------------------------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/blob/d4866b0c/src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml ---------------------------------------------------------------------- diff --git a/src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml b/src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml index c43fa26..9ab054a 100644 --- a/src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml +++ b/src/site/xdoc/manual/async.xml @@ -439,8 +439,8 @@ <p> However, asynchronous loggers need to make this decision before passing the log message to another thread; the location information will be lost after that point. - The performance impact of taking a stack trace snapshot is even higher for asynchronous loggers: - logging with location is 4 - 20 times slower than without location. + The <a href="../performance.html#asyncLoggingWithLocation">performance impact</a> of taking a stack trace snapshot is even higher for asynchronous loggers: + logging with location is 30-100 times slower than without location. For this reason, asynchronous loggers and asynchronous appenders do not include location information by default. </p> <p> @@ -690,54 +690,6 @@ </tr> </table> - <h4>Throughput of Logging With Location (includeLocation="true") - </h4> - <p>On Solaris 10 (64bit) with JDK1.7.0_06, 4-core Xeon X5570 dual CPU - @2.93Ghz with hyperthreading switched off (8 virtual cores): - </p> - <table> - <caption align="top">Throughput in log messages/second per thread</caption> - <tr> - <th>Logger (Log4j 2)</th> - <th>1 thread</th> - <th>2 threads</th> - <th>4 threads</th> - <th>8 threads</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Loggers all asynchronous</td> - <td align="right">75,862</td> - <td align="right">88,775</td> - <td align="right">80,240</td> - <td align="right">68,077</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Loggers mixed sync/async</td> - <td align="right">61,993</td> - <td align="right">66,164</td> - <td align="right">55,735</td> - <td align="right">52,843</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Async Appender</td> - <td align="right">47,033</td> - <td align="right">52,426</td> - <td align="right">50,882</td> - <td align="right">36,905</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Synchronous</td> - <td align="right">31,054</td> - <td align="right">33,175</td> - <td align="right">29,791</td> - <td align="right">23,628</td> - </tr> - </table> - <p>As expected, logging location information has a large performance impact. Asynchronous loggers are 4 - 20 - times slower, while synchronous loggers are 1.3 - 5 times slower. However, if you do need - location information, asynchronous logging will still be faster than synchronous logging. - </p> - <a name="Latency" /> <h4>Latency</h4> <p>Latency tests are done by logging at less than saturation, measuring how long a call to Logger.log
