It's called StatusListener: http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/log4j-api/apidocs/org/apache/logging/log4j/status/StatusListener.html
On 14 December 2015 at 09:34, Nicholas Duane <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm curious if there is such a thing as a StatusAppender in log4j2 which, > as you would guess, is the appender the StatusLogger would use? > > Here's what I'm trying to solve, I think. > > I've been telling other developers I work with that a piece of code should > only write to a single logger. The reason for this, in my mind, is that if > a piece of code writes to more than one logger then it essentially has > routing logic in it and I would rather have the routing in the > configuration. For example: > > try > { > logger1.info(...); > . > . > . > logger2.debug(...); > } > catch(Exception e) > { > logger1.error(...); > } > > The above code is sending debug events to a different logger than the rest > of the events it raises. I would rather have the code send all events to a > single logger and control where those events are routed via the > configuration. Feel free to let me know whether this is in line with > logging principles. > > So here's the problem. We've got some code which writes events to its > logger. We want to capture these events centrally so we're sending them to > a central location via an HTTP appender. We want to do this only for FATAL > - INFO events, so we're not expecting a huge load. DEBUG events however, > we'd like to send to the same location as the status logger. We can, of > course, just add a console appender for DEBUG events but that would have to > be controlled separately from the status logger and ideally it would be > nice to just piggy back on the status logger. We could have this code > write to its private logger and the status logger for DEBUG events, but > then we get into the routing issue I mentioned above. So I'm wondering, is > there such a thing as a StatusAppender? > > Thanks, > Nick > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
