Yes. The Appenders tag inside the ScriptSelector are the Appenders that are to be created. But now that I think about it, we can’t use “Appenders” for this. If you look at the RoutingAppender you will notice that Appenders there are declared under a Route element. The Route plugin is defined with deferChildren=true. This means that whatever is configured under the Route will not be created during initial configuration. Instead the Route keeps a reference to the Node and then configures the Appender when it is required. So we would need a new plugin to wrap the Appenders that are to be created.
Ralph > On Sep 11, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Are the <Appenders> tags really meant to be nested? > > Gary > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 11:48 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Oops. I forgot the closing CDATA tag in the script. > > Ralph > >> On Sep 10, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >> >> Interesting. OS/390. I worked on MVS, OS/370, z/OS, etc many moons ago but >> haven’t worked on a mainframe since 2001. >> >> This sort of sounds like you want an Appender Selector, which would be an >> Appender that uses a Selector to figure out which Appender to delegate to. >> This is a bit like the PatternSelector. I would imagine it would make sense >> to implement AppenderSelectors and LayoutSelectors. You probably would want >> to dynamically initialize the Appenders much like the RoutingAppender does. >> >> Maybe it would look like: >> >> <Appenders> >> <ScriptSelector name=“" default=“”> >> <Script language=“groovy”><