I don't know the answer to this guy's question on the user's list, but it brought up something interesting that we need to look at. Already (in a separate issue) we have talked about needing a config element for JMX so that you don't have to use properties in this manner. IMO, if there's not a way to set these AsyncLogger configuration options in log4j2.xml/json, that needs to be added, too. You should never have to do System.setProperty (or -D on the command line) to get Log4j configured properly.
My $0.02. Nick On Jul 23, 2013, at 10:39 AM, SMITH, CURTIS wrote: > http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/async.html > > This URL describes that v2 has both async logger and async appender. What > is the suggested config for an embedded situation where I want low latency, > nothing fancy? > > I've had do this in code since we don't own the cmd line: OSGi and system > vendor owns the box and java command line. > > System.setProperty("AsyncLoggerContextSelector", > "org.apache.logging.log4j.core.async.AsyncLoggerContextSelector"); > System.setProperty("AsyncLogger.RingBufferSize", "128"); // min size > permissable to keep memory low > System.setProperty("AsyncLogger.WaitStrategy", "Block"); // less CPU, > better for embedded env > System.setProperty("log4j2.disable.jmx", "true"); // saves on a > jmx jar and we don't use JMX anyway > > Tnx curt > > Curt Smith > AT&T Digital Life > DLC Software Development > 404-499-7013 > (cell) 678-365-6508 > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
