This looks like a real mem saver
static {
logger.registerMessage("messagekey", new StringFormattedMessage("%s"));
}
public void run(String param) {
logger.debug("messagekey", param);
Ofcourse doc should say what is thread safe and how to use. Unrelated
but same idea: We saved a few milliseconds and few 1,000 objects by
caching SimpleDateFormats - but can only used the shared instances for
format and not parse
On 10/6/2012 12:23 AM, Paul Benedict wrote:
After reading this email, it occurred to me that Messages/Formats are
typically static. Once instantiated, there is really no need to
instantiate it over and over.
Rather than specifying the Class<?>, perhaps there should be a
registration feature. Maybe like this:
public class MyApp {
public static Logger logger;
static {
logger.registerMessage("messagekey", new
StringFormattedMessage("%s"));
}
public void run(String param) {
logger.debug("messagekey", param);
}
}
Paul
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Ralph Goers
<ralph.go...@dslextreme.com <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote:
I updated ReflectionComparison to include comparing creating the
object via "new" and via reflection.
Timer NewObject stopped. Elapsed time: 0.019149000 seconds Average
per iteration: 0.000000019 seconds
Timer ReflectionObject stopped. Elapsed time: 0.171598000 seconds
Average per iteration: 0.000000171 seconds
So reflection definitely is noticeably slower, but this is only
going to occur after filtering has passed and is probably a good
tradeoff for avoiding calling "new" in the application until it is
actually needed. For example, there would probably be hundreds of
logging calls that wouldn't create an object because filtering
didn't pass, thus compensating for the extra cost of allocating
the objects and immediately discarding them. OTOH, doing
if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
logger.debug(new StringFormattedMessage(format, param));
}
would probably perform better than
logger.debug(StringFormattedMessage.class, format, param);
Ralph
On Oct 5, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Ralph Goers <rgo...@apache.org
<mailto:rgo...@apache.org>> wrote:
Yup. That is what I would expect. However, it probably
requires a Message that has a constructor that accepts a
Throwable and an object array, which means we would probably
want a new interface as a marker.
So would reflection be used at runtime to instantiate the
message? Wouldn't that be a performance hit?
We could just provide APIs in AbstractLogger for the built-in
message classes that do the instance creation w/o reflection.
Thoughts?
Gary
Ralph
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 4, 2012, at 7:18 PM, Paul Benedict
<pbened...@apache.org <mailto:pbened...@apache.org>> wrote:
Ooops. I meant this:
logger.debug(Class<? extends Message> m, Throwable t,
Object... messageParams);
The point was to pass in the Class of the Message so it
doesn't get instantiated unless logging is going to occur.
Paul
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Gary Gregory
<garydgreg...@gmail.com <mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Paul Benedict
<pbened...@apache.org <mailto:pbened...@apache.org>> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Gary Gregory
<garydgreg...@gmail.com
<mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Benedict
<pbened...@apache.org
<mailto:pbened...@apache.org>> wrote:
Ralph,
This is actually a discussion you and I had
a while back when I was trying to figure out
how to use String.format(). I like the model
now of specifying the message class...
however...
It does seem a bit unseemly to instantiate
an xxxMessage object that may never get
used. I'd rather just pass in the Class<?>
and let the logger instantiate it only if it
is going to log something. The only downside
is then configuring the actual class.
Thoughts?
So instead of:
this.logger.debug(new
StringFormattedMessage(format, values), t);
I would do:
this.logger.debug(StringFormattedMessage.class,
t, format, values);
I was thinking of adding this signature:
logger.debug(Message m, Throwable t, Object...
messageParams);
Thoughts?
Pardon me for being dense, but how does that help in the
case of my examples?
Thank you in advance for clarifying,
Gary
Paul
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com
<mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com> | ggreg...@apache.org
<mailto:ggreg...@apache.org>
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
<http://garygregory.wordpress.com/>
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
--
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com <mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com> |
ggreg...@apache.org <mailto:ggreg...@apache.org>
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
<http://garygregory.wordpress.com/>
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
