[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13895869#comment-13895869
]
Geoff Ballinger commented on LOG4J2-531:
----------------------------------------
Thanks for the updates Remko, in particular the comment on the effect of the
{{max}} value on the rollover time which we will definitely take into account
going forward.
For background we originally observed the issue on a system running with a
vanilla {{DefaultRolloverStrategy}} (i.e. max=7) but with a {{size}} of 1GB.
This would have been much quicker to find the next available filename but I
guess much slower to do the rollover due to gzip'ing 1GB of data.
Also we never observed the issue on the first day the system ran, only on the
second and subsequent days, though we haven't repeated it enough times to be
absolutely confident that wasn't just coincidental.
wrt your observation of a 5 minute rollover time I had observed that they were
slow but they are nothing like that slow on my dev system - more like 2-3
seconds. I am using a very vanilla office desktop - i5 w/ a single HDD -
running Ubuntu 13.04. Maybe an OS difference?,
Geoff.
> Rolled log files overwritten by RollingFile appender with composite time and
> size based policies
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-531
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-531
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Appenders
> Affects Versions: 2.0-beta9
> Environment: Ubuntu 12.04 and 13.04, java version "1.7.0_51"
> Reporter: Geoff Ballinger
>
> We have a system which generates high volume logs which are required to be
> preserved for audit purposes, and have been having problems with files being
> unexpectedly overwritten.
> We are using a RollingFile appender with day granularity, time based and size
> based triggering policies, and a rollover strategy with a suitably large max
> value.
> I have created a simple test case with minute granularity to quickly
> illustrate the problem, which is v. similar to the example given in the
> documentation:
> {noformat}
> import org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager;
> import org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger;
> public class LogTest
> {
> private static final Logger logger = LogManager.getLogger("TestLogger");
> public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception
> {
> for (long i=0; ; i+=1) {
> logger.debug("Sequence: " + i);
> Thread.sleep(250);
> }
> }
> }
> {noformat}
> ... with a config of:
> {noformat}
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <Configuration>
> <Appenders>
> <RollingFile name="Test" fileName="logs/test.log"
> filePattern="logs/test/$${date:yyyyMMddHHmm}/TEST-%d{yyyyMMddHHmm}-%i.log.gz">
> <PatternLayout pattern="%d %p (%t) [%c] - %m%n"/>
> <Policies>
> <TimeBasedTriggeringPolicy />
> <SizeBasedTriggeringPolicy size="1 KB"/>
> </Policies>
> <DefaultRolloverStrategy max="999999"/>
> </RollingFile>
> </Appenders>
> <Loggers>
> <Root level="debug">
> <AppenderRef ref="Test"/>
> </Root>
> </Loggers>
> </Configuration>
> {noformat}
> If this is run as is many of the rollover logfiles have other files written
> over them and are lost, as can clearly be seen by the gaps in the remaining
> sequence numbers, and the order the sequence numbers appear in the resulting
> files.
> If the time based policy is removed from the config and it is re-run then all
> sequence numbers are correctly stored and in the expected order., Without the
> time based trigger some are carried over into the folder for the next period
> which is not ideal, though is what we are using at present to avoid data loss.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
