OK. So it seems you are fine we move on with the release.
Will prepare it for the weekend.

Thanks for your support!
A pity, nobody else did comment here.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
> I see no harm in it as the next put will just create a new Hashtable, which 
> shouldn't be all that expensive in new JVMs.  I really am not crazy about it 
> using Hashtable as I really don't see why a Map with synchronized methods is 
> required. But it is probably best to just leave well enough alone on that 
> issue and it isn't necessary to fix this problem.  FWIW, Logback doesn't call 
> remove() when the map is empty and at the moment neither does Log4j 2, but I 
> think I'm going to change it to do it.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Jan 25, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> Hello fellow devs,
>>
>> can one of you give me a hint on this? As you know i am just helping
>> out with log4j and so I am glad about comments from more experienced
>> people, esp, in this case. I really would like to close this issue
>> now.
>>
>> Is it possible to let remove() call clear()?
>>
>> Cheers
>> Christian
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:10 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50486
>>>
>>> --- Comment #12 from [email protected] 2012-01-25 22:10:41 UTC ---
>>> Ok, the patch was accepted, modified and applied I get that.
>>> a) Shouldn't this ticket be marked as 'resolved'?
>>> b) What's the ETA for 1.2.17?
>>>
>>> Also, I believe there's a second issue. The way it's implemented right know
>>> clients must explicitly call MDC.clear(). Couldn't/shouldn't remove() call
>>> clear() internally once the last item was removed()?
>>> How do clients know when to call clear()? In a request processing chain 
>>> (e.g.
>>> Servlet filter) several parties may write items and each one of them is
>>> responsible to call remove() for the items it added. On the way it items are
>>> added, on the way out they're removed in reverse order. And the last guy 
>>> closes
>>> the door i.e. calls clear(). However, how does a client know that he's the
>>> last?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Configure bugmail: 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
>>> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
>>> You are the assignee for the bug.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>



-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to