Jeroen, this should be a post to the user-list, but anyway...
Have you tried to implement the connection pooling?(I am using 1.1.2 where no JDBCAppender is included...not sure if 1.2 have included that) That should help... I suggest you not using JDBCAppender if performance is a concern and there is a J2EE app. server available. In case you really want to log them into database, better use JMSAppender and have a MDB putting all the messages into DB...and also don't forget to use AsyncAppender...That what we are doing now. Of cource the JMS implementation have to be fast too. Jason Tsang System Analyst ITFN HGC http://www.alexchiu.com/affiliates/clickthru.cgi?id=sarsip > -----Original Message----- > From: Frissaer, Jeroen [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 5:39 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: JDBCAppender performance > > Hi everybody, > > I started using Log4j last week and find it a really great product. We > will > be using Log4J in a performance critical application. As appenders we > will > use the FileAppender, SocketAppender and JDBCAppender. After some tests > however, I noticed that the performance of log4j is severly degraded when > there is a blockage on the Database level. > > The execution time of the program was more than 76 times higher. > > When I stop the database (to simulate a crash) the execution time is even > much worse (more than 2790 times higher) which is unacceptable off course. > > Does anyone encountered the same problem, or knows how to deal with it? > We > could rewrite the JDBCAppender but prefer not to, due to time limitations. > > Thanks in advance for your comments and suggestions > > Best regards > Jeroen Frissaer > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
