No, I have nothing particular in mind for that. Just to let you know - and not to put any pressure on - I am waiting for this page before we do a release. I think it is pretty important, especially with the detailed results you are producing.
Ralph > On May 7, 2016, at 9:33 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Ralph, > > Started to work on a benchmark to compare Log4j2's File, RandomAccessFile, > MemoryMappedFile, Console and Rewrite appenders. > Is there any particular scenario you want to test with Rewrite appenders? > > Remko > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:51 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com > <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: > I will flesh things out further in this ticket: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1179 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1179> > > > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:42 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > This all sounds really good! > > Yes, the filter comparison isn’t as clear as it should be. Yes, it is how > long it takes to deny the events in nanoseconds. The results were generated > by the FilterPerformanceComparison test class. At the time I tested with 2 > Filters - a Marker filter and the MDC filter. If you look at BasicMarker in > SLF4J you will notice that the hasReferences method is synchronized. In > multi-threaded cases this can cause huge performance issues if you have a > Marker with references to other markers (I personally experienced this). > Also, the referenceList is a Vector, so the contains methods can throw > ConcurrentModificationExceptions if Markers are modified during execution, > even though the add and remove methods are synchronized the contains method > is not. > > The test is currently set up to compare the MDC/ThreadContext Filters during > the build. However, I am not sure it is correct. I don’t actually see it > setting the value in the thread context, so it wouldn’t be denying the events. > > Ralph > >> On May 1, 2016, at 12:44 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com >> <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I've started to work on this. >> >> Question: >> the current page has a section comparing the performance Log4j 2 Filters to >> Logback Filters. Can you point me to the test that generated these results? >> What is being tested? I am guessing this is how long it takes to call >> logger.log(level, msg) when the filter DENIES the event, is this correct? Is >> the unit for the result numbers nanosecond/operation? >> >> I'm thinking to convert the above filter test to a JMH benchmark. This would >> allow people to quickly verify the results on their own machine. >> >> I need to think a bit on the items to put on the performance page (and to >> create benchmarks for). >> >> * One theme will be a comparison of Log4j 2 to other logging libraries like >> Logback/Log4j1/JUL. One thing to measure is synchronized logging throughput. >> I'll use this chart >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1297?focusedCommentId=15256490&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15256490> >> for the performance page and use a simpler graph on the garbage-free manual >> page. >> * Comparing File/RandomAccessFile/MemoryMappedFile appenders >> * Documenting the performance of TCP/UDP appenders >> * Compare parameterized logging to string concatenation >> * Perhaps investigate/document the overhead of using the adapter/bridge >> modules (Log4j1-api, commons-logging, slf4j, JUL adapter)? >> * Lock-free async logging versus blocking async logging (just a paragraph >> with link to the async logging manual page) >> * Any Layouts to compare? >> >> I plan to do most of the performance testing with JMH. The response time >> test I'm using to test garbage-free latency gives a more nuanced picture but >> is more work to execute, gather results, analyse etc. >> >> I'll flesh this out more over the coming week. Feedback welcome as always. >> >> Remko >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >> Either in the manual or a link above it >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Apr 26, 2016, at 4:41 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com >> <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>> Will do. Was on my TODO-eventually list but I'll move it up. :-) >>> Shall we included it in the manual then? >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >>> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >>> Remko, >>> >>> The performance page hasn’t been updated in quite some time. It really >>> could use some of your nice graphs. Also, it isn’t linked from the main >>> menu. The only way I know of to find it is by clicking a link embedded in >>> the About page. Do you think you could enhance that page? It would be >>> great to see a variation of the chart you made for garbage free logging, >>> although I am just thinking of a few charts comparing Log4j 1, Log4j 2, >>> Logback and JUL in various scenarios. Something similar to >>> https://www.loggly.com/blog/benchmarking-java-logging-frameworks/ >>> <https://www.loggly.com/blog/benchmarking-java-logging-frameworks/> would >>> be nice, but with similar configurations instead of relying on defaults. >>> >>> I am still aware that we may need to make improvements to the >>> SocketAppender. I still intend to create a version that uses Netty, >>> >>> Ralph >>> >> > > >
