On Sep 18, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Joern Huxhorn wrote: > Sorry, I was confused and mixed something up... > > I *planned* to implement a thread-specific sequence number but never did so. > I also considered logging the ThreadGroup-hierarchy but didn't do so, yet, > because of the expected performance impact. > > Which reminds me, completely off-topic, of another idea concerning a custom > Message implementation: > A ThreadDumpMessage that would not get any parameter at all and would consist > of a ThreadDump if it is actually logged, including the ThreadGroup info etc.. > This would have helped me immensely in the past. Instead, I had to trigger > thread dumps via SIG_QUIT at a random points of execution. > > Such a Message wouldn't be used in production under normal circumstances but > could be enabled in case of strange concurrency issues...
I added it, but as I said, I wish I knew how to include the locks. FWIW, I could have used this 2 days ago when we were trying to debug just such a concurrency issue. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
