[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-376?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12652752#action_12652752
]
Ceki Gulcu commented on JSPWIKI-376:
------------------------------------
Performance of both enabled and disabled log statements have significance.
There mere introduction of an indirection via an additional interface adds cost
to each method invocation. This impacts disabled log statements.
For enabled log statements, as mentioned in my previous comment, message
formatting in java.lang.String is more flexible but also much slower than SLF4J
message formatting. So you will be roughly doubling the cost of *enabled* log
statements.
If you are still interested in discussing this topic, please let us do so on
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Move from log4j to slf4j
> ------------------------
>
> Key: JSPWIKI-376
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JSPWIKI-376
> Project: JSPWiki
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core & storage
> Reporter: Janne Jalkanen
> Assignee: Harry Metske
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
> Attachments: jspwiki-log.odp
>
>
> SLF4J allows far more flexible logging than log4j, and it would allow us to
> get rid of these dumb log4j compatibility problems that sometimes occur. It
> also plays better with other applications, gives the user more power to
> choose how to log his stuff, and is also pretty cool otherwise. The change
> would be relatively trivial, and would probably be largely invisible to the
> users (since we could continue shipping with necessary log4j jars).
> http://www.slf4j.org
> The license is MIT/X11, so that's fine.
> Opinions?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
