Guys, I've been reading a little bit about OSGi lately, and that seems like the perfect use case when combined with servlet 3.0. The thing is, making minimal JARs is a lot like making bundles.
The issue I see with async servlets, though, is how to manage the thread local logger context when an async servlet can have multiple threads. The most trivial way to make the proper logger context available _somewhere_ is using request attributes or the servlet context attributes (which is already being used to hold the initializer which holds the logger context anyway). That's the thing, though. With multiple threads in a single web app instance, it's hard to manage state for all those threads without being higher up in the food chain. I don't think implementing this as a filter is the best way to go for servlet 3.0. On 18 January 2014 15:19, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > I was hoping to start the GA release sooner than that. > > If the servlet context initializer is disabled then the listener should > still be allowed. > > Ralph > > On Jan 18, 2014, at 11:38 AM, Nicholas Williams < > nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote: > > Yes. Next weekend I plan on adding a Servlet context parameter that allows > the user to disable starting Log4j automatically. That should allow us to > keep everything in one JAR while supporting both sides of the argument. > > Nick > > Sent from my iPhone, so please forgive brief replies and frequent typos > > On Jan 18, 2014, at 10:54, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Ralph Goers > <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote: > >> I’ve always had reservations about the servlet 3.0 automatic >> configuration because if the log4j jar is present it can’t be disabled or >> be modified by the end user. We’ve had some issues with Spring >> initialization and now LOG4J2-452 reinforces that. I would propose that if >> we want to keep it that we move the minimum amount required into its own >> jar so that users have a choice as to whether it is automatically >> initialized. >> >> Am I the only one who feels this way? Frankly, this and one other issue >> I plan to work on this weekend are the only things I see as blockers for a >> GA release. >> > > For me, the fewer jars, the better. Can't this be configured somehow > without having to do more jar juggling? > > Gary > > >> >> Ralph >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Nick Williams <nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> >> wrote: >> >> Filter initialization is one of the last things to happen in web app >> startup. The ServletContainerInitializer sets the threads logger context so >> that web app startup procedures can use it. The filter's init() method >> clears it near the end of startup so that it doesn't bleed into another web >> app. >> >> Then, on web apps shutdown, destruction of filters is one of the first >> things to happen. The filter's destroy() sets the logger context so that >> the web app shutdown procedures can use it. >> >> Nick >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:17 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: >> >> Now I'm not sure if I'm interpreting this correctly, but init() clears >> the current thread's logger context, and destroy() sets it. What's up with >> this? Especially since it just gets set and cleared in the doFilter() bit. >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second > Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
