Andrew Scherpbier wrote:
> The object reference and method call are still performed even if nothing
> gets logged. By using a simple test, that overhead is removed if it is
> not needed.
> This is actually a big deal. It is even better if the test can be done
> on a constant, because then the compiler can decide if the code needs to
> be included or not and there is no overhead if the constant is false.
Using compile time constants to turn diagnostics on and off is something
of a hot point for me - it can make it very difficult to diagnose
problems in typical production environments in the companies I work with
(rebuilding the app. server to get diagnostics is a no-happen)
from the log4j FAQ: "... evaluating a category takes less than 1% of the
time it takes to actually log a statement."
There are a _few_ places in the JBoss code where I'd worry about this
overhead, but not too many.
Actually, in the deployer, I wouldn't bother with the test at all.
>
> marc fleury wrote:
>
>> ???
>>
>> I have a conflict on ServiceDeployer.java
>>
>> the conflict is due to the inclusion of "if (debug) log.debug(...)"
>>
>> with debug being log.isDebugEnabled()...
>>
>> do we need to explicitely do that? I thought part of the interest is that
>> the log4j thing would not do anything with the messages if debug was not
>> enabled so why the explicit test?
>>
>> I will remove these unless something clearly says the contrary
>>
>> marcf
>>
>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Marc Fleury
>> President
>> JBoss Group, LLC
>> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Jboss-development mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
