On Jul 14, 2005, at 5:01 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
That is a biggie isn't it...
I feel quite a bit uncomfortable about attempting this for 1.2.x.
My rationale is that 1.2.x has been around a LONG time now. I know
"better the devil you know" is not a great way to develop software,
but in this case I think we may end up creating more problems for
our users than we solve. I hedge towards just making sure this
problem can't happen in the 1.3.x series (which I believe it can't
with the Read/Write lock stuff Ceki did).
Paul
I agree that it is too potentially disruptive to attempt in 1.2.x.
I'm not ready to commit to doing it in 1.3, however. log4j currently
does fairly coarse synchronization which has been raised as an issue
repeatedly (the whole concurrent appender proposal, for example) and
refactoring synchronization would likely be a 2.0.x type of change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
