On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote:
> 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. > Does this mean you use Log4j with the "monitorInterval" Confuguration attribute? Or can this user also restart the application by hand for the new logging configuration to take effect? Gary > > 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 > > -- 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