DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUGĀ·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24159>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED ANDĀ·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24159





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-07-15 03:19 -------

I'm the person who filed the bug 1 1/2 years ago...

Despite having to wait, I think that 1.2 is probably too early and
likely too disruptive.  You would have to change the synchronization
behavior of AppenderSkeleton, which would subtly break classes that
extend AppenderSkeleton or its subclasses.

In 1.3, you have already cleaned up the coarse locking in the Category
(Logger) class with respect to adding and removing appenders by using a
read-write lock.  This is a step in the right direction.  My concurrent
appender uses the same read-write class and my AppenderSkeleton (called
ConcurrentAppender) is nearly identical in implementation to the
original, except for a few additional finer-locked objects.

For 1.3, it would be reasonable to include a concurrent appender tree.
In addition to having better performance and less coarse locking (and no
dead-locks), it would be a reasonable parent class for network- and
JDBC-based loggers.  Eventually, they could form the basis of appenders
in a future release.

>From working with application services (namely JBoss) for over two
years, it is imperative to have a logging subsystem that is dead-lock
free and high-performance on two and four-processor machines.  Although,
we do not log a huge volume typically, it is necessary for debugging a
live a system.  My original complaint came from debugging a third-party
library on a application system.

If you want a more current version of the concurrent.zip for review, please let
me know.  "Changes against Log4J 1.3 CVS" is out of date.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to