Sorry, my intent wasn't to recommend a change in the naming convention in general or start controversy.
I simply don't know a lot about the resources used per logger, and am just looking for guidance/advice on how to name loggers in large systems. It appears your advice is to include the class name, and that's fine. I was just wondering if there are any thoughts/evidence to the contrary. I would also love to have an explanation as to the resources used per logger, but this may require too long an explanation. Hope this makes sense. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:17 AM To: Log4J Users List Subject: RE: Scalability: Seeking advice on logger names Howdy, We have systems with thousands of classes, each having a private static final Logger with its name as the full class name. We haven't run into scalability or performance problems related to this. Losing the ability to turn the debug level for a specific class (as opposed to a package) at runtime can be very significant. That's not something we'd be willing to do. As for the gain, what would you expect to win by changing the naming convention? You'd save very little memory I think. Have you tried both ways with a profiler? Yoav Shapira Millennium ChemInformatics >-----Original Message----- >From: Lutz Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:10 AM >To: 'Log4J Users List' >Subject: Scalability: Seeking advice on logger names > > >For systems consisting of thousands and possibly even tens of thousands of >classes, >are there scalability advantages to naming loggers by their package name >only, >as opposed to scoping completely down to the class name? (Specifically >referring to >the "Logger.getLogger("a.b.class");" call.) > >I'm thinking there may be reasons (for scalability) not to include the >actual class >name in the logger names, and just stop at the lowest level package name. > >Your thoughts are appreciated. > >Mike > >----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >---- >This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Medical >Solutions >Health Services Corporation and are intended only for the addressee(s). >The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or >otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, >printing, >copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and >may >be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to >believe >you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message >and >notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Medical Solutions Health Services Corporation and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
