Yes, persistent buffering can prevent the data loss but adds to the complexity. The Flume Appender does that.
I will take a look at the scribe appender when I get a chance. Ralph On May 1, 2014, at 8:39 AM, Michael Wechner <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 01.05.14 17:18, schrieb Ralph Goers: >> I guarantee you, on a busy system with lots of logging sending a SOAP >> message for every event will be a problem. > > I can second/confirm that. > > We have developed such an appender in order to log user requests for > user tracking and personalization > > https://github.com/wyona/yanel/blob/master/conf/log4j.properties > > whereas see the boosthttp configuration >> If they are being bundled so that multiple events are sent in each request >> that will perform better > > yes, that's what we do >> but could result in losing all the events that are buffered. > > one can buffer them persistently, or do I misunderstand you? > > I am not sure whether "refactoring" > https://github.com/joshdevins/log4j-scribe-appender might make sense, but > it probably makes sense to have a look at it. > > HTH > > Michael >> >> Ralph >> >> >> On May 1, 2014, at 7:26 AM, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> Dell - Internal Use - Confidential >>> Not necessarily. Remember that the people who read these logs are not in >>> the processing loop, and therefore do not slow down the process, >>> What is required is an asynchronous thread or process to do the soap >>> transfer during off cycles, and storage to receive the messages from the >>> Processing stream. Some sort of queuing and thread, or database storage >>> might be used. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ralph Goers [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 11:16 PM >>> To: Log4J Users List >>> Subject: Re: Web Service Appender >>> >>> A web service to do what? Logging via SOAP would be extremely slow if every >>> log event is a single request. Can you elaborate on what you really want to >>> do? >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2014, at 9:10 PM, Evan J wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for verifying this. I thought I might be missing an obvious, >>>> and this has already been implemented by at least someone. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Remko Popma wrote: >>>> >>>>> Evan, no I'm not aware of any appender that logs to a web service. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Evan J >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I searched around, but I could not find an off-the-shelf Appender >>>>>> that sends logs to a web service. Is there any? >>>>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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] >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
