You could turn off logging altogether in the log4j configuration and see what happens. There will still be some overhead compared to removing logging completely, for calls like:
Logger.info(calculateOneMillionDigitsOfPi()); But that's not too common, so it should give you an idea of whether log4j is the culprit or not. Either that or try profiling your app to see where it's actually spending its time. Zellyn Zellyn Hunter CDC Information Technology Support Contract (CITS) Software Engineer 4 404-639-7574 404-639-7721 (fax) -----Original Message----- From: Pete Stokes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 5:10 AM To: Log4J Users List Subject: Re: performance problems IBM JVM We have no idea what the problem is, someone suggested I try ammending log4j settings. We can't remove it totally - it's part of this 3rd party app. All I can do is make the setting basic. Pete. Robbie Baldock wrote: > Are you sure it's log4j which is causing the problem? ;-) > > In other words, what happens if you remove it? > > > Robbie > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pete Stokes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 9:38 AM > To: Log4J Users List > Subject: Re: performance problems IBM JVM > > > I took out the log4j bits and changed Layout class to SimpleLayout. Even > tried that immediateFlush thing, but to no success! The app on the > iSeries performed *slightly* better, i.e. avg mean time for pages = > 25sec rather than 27sec. Tomcat gets sub half second consistently. > > I was really hoping this was going to be our magic quick fix! :( > > <appender name="FILE" class="org.apache.log4j.RollingFileAppender"> > <param name="File" value="InsureFaces.log"/> > <param name="MaxFileSize" value="500KB"/> > <layout class="org.apache.log4j.SimpleLayout"> > </layout> > > Pete. > > > > Tim Williams wrote: > >>My understanding is that it is the creation of an Exception that is >>expensive (because of the calculation of stacktrace information ?). The >>actual throwing is less expensive. Isn't it that log4j uses the > > stacktrace > >>data to intelligently mine information. So even though it never throws > > the > >>exception the overhead of creation is still incurred. >> >>..then again I could be wrong :) >> >>Tim. > > > > ************************************************************************ **** > ******* > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended > solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. > If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by > MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. > ************************************************************************ **** > ******* > For any information on the Quinn Group of Companies please visit :- > > http://www.quinn-group.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ************************************************************************ *********** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. ************************************************************************ *********** For any information on the Quinn Group of Companies please visit :- http://www.quinn-group.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
