Still new to Log4J and I want to get an idea if it's really the right tool for what I need. In some respects it's spot on - I need to be able to log exceptions at different priorities and categories. ok, so far so good.
However, there's another requirement which is somewhat different, and that's an auditing requirement. Correctly or not, I consider auditing, at least of the kind I need, to be a separate kind of activity than exception logging for 2 reasons: 1. There is no priority concept for auditing. Or, if you'd like, auditing is all of level "info" - but there's no need to distinguish between one kind of auditing and another in terms of priority. 2. At least in the system I'd be working with, exceptions are just exceptions which don't differ much as far as the information stored (message, time, stack trace, etc), but one audit trail may differ widely from another. For example, in a brokerage system, an audit record for a buy order will differ significantly from an audit record for a customer registering on the system. This information would also need to be captured relationally (I know log4j has some jdbc appenders) Where log4J would still come in handy is in its configuration of categories. The ability to turn on and off audit trails (a requirement of the system) could probably be handled through log4j's configuration of categories. However, given the differences, does log4j still make sense for auditing? In Paul Glezen's article "Adding conversion characters to patternlayout" he extends 6 classes just to log some new information -- if auditing has a heavy "information extension" requirement, perhaps log4j doesn't fit the bill in this case. Thanks for any thoughts on this. Noah __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals http://personals.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
