On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Scott Deboy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is support for the concept of an event sink (receivers) going to be > straightforward to implement using log4j2's configuration support? > > I just want to make sure we are covering our bases there. It would be > great to have explicit support for receivers, the same as we have for > appenders. > While it isn't there now I don't see any reason it couldn't be added. I've implemented a couple of standalone servers but not integrated with the configuration. It would require a change to BaseConfiguration and we would need a Receiver interface - is there one? I'm pretty sure they would need to use Managers just as the Appenders to so that they can survive a reconfiguration. > For the socketappender, can it be configured to be multicast? If so, it > would be good to be able to provide in the interface that was going to be > used. > I haven't programmed multicast recently but my recollection was that it isn't too different. I don't see why it couldn't be supported. > > There are of course other appenders (the reverse-connect > sockethubappender, for example), and the other network-based appenders > which can probably be replaced by this single socket appender if it were > beefed up a bit. There is still a lot of work to do. I've not implemented a DB Appender, JMX support, OSGi support but I believe the foundation is there for them. Logback supports XML and Groovy as configuration mechanisms. Currently, Log4j 2 currently supports XML and JSON. I've not convinced myself why using a DSL is a good thing but it should be easy to add if desired. Ralph Ralph
