Maybe what I'm trying to do is not that useful. However, I'm guessing the
person mucking around with things would probably feel uncomfortable deleting
entries in the config. If they are familiar with log4j they might feel
comfortable setting the level if they think they should be turning things off.
Basically, we have what we'll call "always on" or "24x7" logging. This is
about always having INFO and more critical turned on. I'm just looking for
ways to help enforce that.
Thanks,
Nick
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:24:07 -0700
> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > I guess the main use case we're trying to solve is someone, maybe some
> > admin or maybe a developer asking the admin, thinking they should turn
> > logging off and thus sets the level to "OFF". We always want INFO and more
> > critical levels to be on no matter what.
> >
>
> But if a user gets in a config file and sets the root level to off, how can
> you stop him or her from removing your filters and custom levels?
>
> Gary
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > > Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > From: x...@dds.nl
> > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:55:23 +0200
> > >
> > > I think it is still unclear what you mean by "below". Normally I would
> > > consider "trace" to be at the low end and "fatal" to be at the high end,
> > > but I don't think there is a low and high in Log4J. When you say "below"
> > > I take it you mean DEBUG and TRACE, but the only thing that makes sense
> > > to me is to keep INFO, ERROR and FATAL on.
> > >
> > > Regards, Bart.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Op 26-8-2015 om 3:46 schreef Nicholas Duane:
> > > > Yes and no. The user might know how to turn on/off logging, but they
> > might not understand what the enterprise is wanting to do. We would like
> > to make it hard, if not impossible, to turn off logging of INFO and below
> > (or above for .NET) events. So even if something thinks they should turn
> > off logging and sets the level to "OFF" we still want INFO and below to be
> > logged.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > > >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:25:09 +0900
> > > >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you explain a bit more about your use case before we zoom in on
> > a specific solution?
> > > >>
> > > >> I'd like to understand better what you mean by [if someone sets the
> > level to "OFF"]?
> > > >> What is the scenario? Someone logs into the server and modifies the
> > configuration and makes a mistake? Or is this a client distributed to your
> > users' PCs and they may modify the configuration?
> > > >>
> > > >> It sounds like you are trying to protect against human error; is that
> > the case?
> > > >>
> > > >> Sent from my iPhone
> > > >>
> > > >>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:37, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> No. Redefining existing levels is to help ensure we have "24x7"
> > logging always on. So even if someone sets the level to "OFF" we still get
> > INFO and above. Basically we'll have levels higher (or lower based on what
> > platform we're talking about) than INFO OFF by default and only turn them
> > on when needed.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Nick
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:33:34 +0900
> > > >>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > >>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > > >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Is redefining levels a way to work around the issue you had with
> > the range
> > > >>>> check?
> > > >>>> I've replied to your range check question with a link to an example
> > config.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Gary Gregory <
> > garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Well, let's all work together to get you up and running. Hopefully
> > we'll
> > > >>>>> get other devs to keep chiming in.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Gary
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> I will get to that. However, I assume that works as that's
> > documented
> > > >>>>>> pretty well. So I'm looking at the other things which may or may
> > not
> > > >>>>> work
> > > >>>>>> as I have to find out what blocking issues we're going to run
> > into.
> > > >>>>>> Redefining existing levels is one. I sent the other email
> > regarding
> > > >>>>> range
> > > >>>>>> level filter as we also need that to work. It works in .NET. So
> > far
> > > >>>>> it's
> > > >>>>>> looking like I'll need to write my own filter for log4j2 in order
> > to get
> > > >>>>>> range level filtering working.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>> Nick
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:54:08 -0700
> > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > >>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > >>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Ah, well, let's start with the documented stuff we know should
> > work ;-)
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Gary
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks. I assumed my 'BUSINESS' level is working using the
> > > >>>>>> <CustomLevel>,
> > > >>>>>>>> though I haven't tried it yet as I was trying to validate
> > redefining
> > > >>>>>>>> existing level.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>> Nick
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:32:01 -0700
> > > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > >>>>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > >>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Nick,
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Your BUSINESS level should be configurable per
> > > >>>>>
> > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/customloglevels.html#DefiningLevelsInConfiguration
> > > >>>>>>>>> I can't look into the rest ATM.
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Gary
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Nicholas Duane <
> > nic...@msn.com>
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>> I guess I should have mentioned, though it's probably obvious,
> > > >>>>>> that I'm
> > > >>>>>>>>>> only interested in a configuration based solution. I'm not
> > > >>>>> looking
> > > >>>>>>>> for a
> > > >>>>>>>>>> code solution.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Nick
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> From: nic...@msn.com
> > > >>>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: redefining existing levels?
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:05:47 -0400
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the reply. I've seen that documentation and it
> > > >>>>> appears
> > > >>>>>> to
> > > >>>>>>>> be
> > > >>>>>>>>>> geared toward defining (NEW) custom levels. It doesn't
> > mention
> > > >>>>>>>> anything
> > > >>>>>>>>>> about redefining existing log4j2 levels. I also tried it and
> > so
> > > >>>>>> far
> > > >>>>>>>> in my
> > > >>>>>>>>>> testing it doesn't seem to work. Below is a snippet of my
> > > >>>>>> config. By
> > > >>>>>>>> the
> > > >>>>>>>>>> way, you'll see that I am currently trying the <CustomLevel>
> > and
> > > >>>>>>>> <level>.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> At first I had just tried <CustomLevel> but it didn't appear
> > to
> > > >>>>>> work
> > > >>>>>>>> so I
> > > >>>>>>>>>> thought I would put the same elements I have in my .NET config
> > > >>>>>> which
> > > >>>>>>>> work.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately it still doesn't work.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <name value="OFF"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <value value="500"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> </level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <CustomLevels>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <CustomLevel name="OFF" intLevel="500"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> </CustomLevels>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <Loggers>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <Logger name="HelloWorld" level="OFF">
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef ref="debug"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> </Logger>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> <Root>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> </Root>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> </Loggers>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> I then set my logger level to "OFF" and didn't see any debug
> > > >>>>> events
> > > >>>>>>>> show
> > > >>>>>>>>>> up. If I set the level to "DEBUG" they show up in the log.
> > The
> > > >>>>>> docs
> > > >>>>>>>> say
> > > >>>>>>>>>> that DEBUG is set to 500, so me setting OFF to 500 and then
> > > >>>>>> setting the
> > > >>>>>>>>>> level on my logger to OFF should have allowed the debug
> > events to
> > > >>>>>> flow
> > > >>>>>>>> to
> > > >>>>>>>>>> the log file, correct?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Nick
> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 12:50:32 -0700
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Nicholas,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, please see
> > > >>>>> https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/customloglevels.html
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> If the documentation can be improved, please let us know how.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gary
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Nicholas Duane <
> > > >>>>> nic...@msn.com
> > > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Can existing log4j2 levels be redefined? I'm able to do
> > this
> > > >>>>>> in
> > > >>>>>>>>>> log4net.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I have yet to see any documentation telling me that I can do
> > > >>>>>> it,
> > > >>>>>>>>>> however,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> there was none telling me I could do it for .NET either. I
> > > >>>>>> just
> > > >>>>>>>>>> happen to
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> stumble upon a post which eluded to it. Here is what I've
> > > >>>>>> done in
> > > >>>>>>>> a
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> log4net config file:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <configuration>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <log4net>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <name value="Off"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <value value="40000"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <name value="Business"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <value value="130000"/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> </log4net>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> </configuration>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> As you can see I created my own 'Business' level. I also
> > > >>>>>> redefined
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Off to
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 40000 which happens to be the INFO level. This makes it
> > such
> > > >>>>>> that
> > > >>>>>>>> if
> > > >>>>>>>>>> they
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> set the level to Off they will still receive INFO and higher
> > > >>>>>> level
> > > >>>>>>>>>> events.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Can the same thing be done in log4j2?
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nick
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <
> > > >>>>>> http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > >>>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > >>>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > >>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <
> > http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > >>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > >>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > >>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > >>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > >>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > >>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <
> > http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > >>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > >>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > >>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > >>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > >>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > >>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > >>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > >>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > >>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > >>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > >>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > > >>>
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
