Howdy, org.apache.log4j.Hierarchy#setThreshold is what you're looking for, I believe. AppenderSkeleton also has setThreshold, but you want the message level evaluated earlier in the logging process.
Yoav Shapira Millennium ChemInformatics >-----Original Message----- >From: David McVicar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:40 AM >To: Log4J Developers List >Subject: RE: Performance of not logging in Log4J vs. JDK 1.4 Logging > >Yoav, > >Thanks for the reply. The test was iterating 10 >million times so that the performance could be >measured - its not that I am actually planning to log >that often. > >I am aware that I can apply these checks before >logging however I would prefer if I didn't have to add >them everywhere I am logging in my code. > >Would there be a way where these checks could be >included in Log4J itself - thereby preventing the >overhead of having to write checks everywhere. > >David > >--- "Shapira, Yoav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Howdy, >> This is why you surround your code in isInfoEnabled >> / isDebugEnabled / >> isEnabledFor clauses if you're going to have >> millions of logging >> statements. That has the potential to reduce the >> cost of (not) logging >> by two orders of magnitude. >> >> Yoav Shapira >> Millennium ChemInformatics >> >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: David McVicar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:21 AM >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject: Performance of not logging in Log4J vs. >> JDK 1.4 Logging >> > >> >Hi, >> > >> >I have written a basic test to exercise the effect >> of >> >adding logging to an application but configuring no >> >logging to be output. The test consists of some >> JUnit >> >tests that repeatedly call both the Log4J and JDK >> 1.4 >> >Logger.log(Level.INFO, "Hello") method 10million >> times >> >(its just a test so please don't flame me for using >> >Property to pass the loopCount!). The tests are >> >configured using log4j.xml (Log4J) and >> >logging.properties (JDK 1.4). I used the JUnitPerf >> >classes from Clarkware.com to measure the >> performance. >> > >> >Unforunately I have found that Log4J 1.2.8 took >> 2023ms >> >while JDK 1.4.2 took only 892ms. >> > >> >The performance while not logging is a concern in >> my >> >application. I am aware that I could instrument >> the >> >generated byte code using Just4Log but would prefer >> >not to add a post compilation step. >> > >> >I have read through the code and it appears that >> the >> >effort of evaluating the >> priority.isGreaterOrEqual() >> >is where the time is being lost. >> > >> > public >> > void log(Priority priority, Object message) { >> > if(repository.isDisabled(priority.level)) { >> > return; >> > } >> > >> >>if(priority.isGreaterOrEqual(this.getEffectiveLevel())) >> > forcedLog(FQCN, priority, message, null); >> > } >> > >> >Would it be possible during configuration of Log4J >> >that a flag be set to disable the entire repository >> if >> >all of the Categories are turned OFF? >> > >> >Although I think that I have configured both Log4J >> and >> >JDK 1.4 not to log using a specific class name the >> >costs of not logging are greater in Log4J. I may >> >however have made an error in my configuration - if >> so >> >I apologise in advance. >> > >> >I have enclosed the tests for reference. >> > >> >I have been a user of Log4J for about 3 years and >> >would like to say a quick thanks for all of your >> good >> >work. >> > >> >Thanks in advance for any assistance you can >> provide >> >in improving the performance of Log4J. >> > >> >David >> > >> > >> >__________________________________ >> >Do you Yahoo!? >> >Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears >> >http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ >> >> >> >> This e-mail, including any attachments, is a >> confidential business communication, and may contain >> information that is confidential, proprietary and/or >> privileged. This e-mail is intended only for the >> individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not >> be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by >> anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended >> recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail >> from your computer system and notify the sender. >> Thank you. >> >> >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears >http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system and notify the sender. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
