[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10092?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16295995#comment-16295995
]
Appy edited comment on HBASE-10092 at 12/19/17 7:58 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------
Finished a pass.
Review:
# Let's do some basic verifications (reverting this patch would be hell,
wouldn't want to do it because we missed basic checks)
** An example of new log message for exception (can get it from a test throwing
exception)
** Make sure tests have debug messages in them
# Please add markers for fatal. It's very important piece of info in logs
(searching for 'fatal' takes you nearest to the cause for process crash) . We
shouldn't just change them to errors.
# What about properties file? Are they being used by slf4j? Do they just work
or need change?
# What about logging guards? An analysis of work involved would be good. A
count of is*Enabled strings would be enough to decide if it should be followup
or get removed overtime. But definitely let's not wait this patch on guards.
# Let's move backup and http too if possible (or reason why it's not possible)
# Update the change summary and add to commit message. Mention:
** programmatic was removed because not supported in slf4j.
** Log guards not removed.
** Any remaining uses of old logger
** Anything else of relevance.
was (Author: appy):
Finished a pass.
Review:
- Let's do some basic verifications (reverting this patch would be hell,
wouldn't want to do it because we missed basic checks)
** An example of new log message for exception (can get it from a test throwing
exception)
** Make sure tests have debug messages in them
- Please add markers for fatal. It's very important piece of info in logs
(searching for 'fatal' takes you nearest to the cause for process crash) . We
shouldn't just change them to errors.
- What about properties file? Are they being used by slf4j? Do they just work
or need change?
- What about logging guards? An analysis of work involved would be good. A
count of is*Enabled strings would be enough to decide if it should be followup
or get removed overtime. But definitely let's not wait this patch on guards.
- Let's move backup and http too if possible (or reason why it's not possible)
- Update the change summary and add to commit message. Mention:
** programmatic was removed because not supported in slf4j.
** Log guards not removed.
** Any remaining uses of old logger
** Anything else of relevance.
> Move up on to log4j2
> --------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-10092
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10092
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: stack
> Assignee: Balazs Meszaros
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 2.0.0-beta-1
>
> Attachments: 10092.txt, 10092v2.txt, HBASE-10092-preview-v0.patch,
> HBASE-10092.master.001.patch, HBASE-10092.master.002.patch, HBASE-10092.patch
>
>
> Allows logging with less friction. See http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/
> This rather radical transition can be done w/ minor change given they have an
> adapter for apache's logging, the one we use. They also have and adapter for
> slf4j so we likely can remove at least some of the 4 versions of this module
> our dependencies make use of.
> I made a start in attached patch but am currently stuck in maven dependency
> resolve hell courtesy of our slf4j. Fixing will take some concentration and
> a good net connection, an item I currently lack. Other TODOs are that will
> need to fix our little log level setting jsp page -- will likely have to undo
> our use of hadoop's tool here -- and the config system changes a little.
> I will return to this project soon. Will bring numbers.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
