On Dec 2, 2005, at 6:44 AM, Endre Stølsvik wrote:
log4j should -definately- be -extremely into- synchronization
issues. I
myself log -a whole lot-, and if I'm hit by synchs on every log
even if
the debug or trace is turned off, this will eat a -ton- of time.
Remember
that synching becomes REALLY BIG if you're running on a NUMA-
machine or
even on multi-cpu/core machines.
What I was saying was the thread had devolved to a general discussion
of Java synchronization unrelated to log4j. The code that originally
prompted the thread is no longer in log4j. The code in the later
parts of the thread were an attempt to design an working double-
checked idiom pattern and wasn't tied to any particular code in
log4j. Good luck if Trenton comes up with a pattern that achieves
his goal, but log4j-user is the wrong forum for breakthroughs in Java
threading. Some of the thread would have been appropriate for log4j-
dev.
On Dec 2, 2005, at 12:19 AM, Trenton D. Adams wrote:
You learn something new every day. :) It's not like a guy is
going to check out the assembled code of something so simple, to
make sure it's doing it right. I guess this is one of those
things you'd either have to run into, or be told about.
Or read books. Every Java developer should read "Effective Java",
there are other specific books on multi thread programming in Java,
but I don't have time to review my stack to provide recommendations
at the moment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
