I also sent a message to the mailing list about this 4 days before: https://lists.apache.org/thread/yoj9bdfqfph6q03t26r5mrdc37zjd9nw but there's been no response yet.
For now I just started using %xEx, but I'd appreciate it if this feature could be supported for %ex as well. Thanks, Damien On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 6:40 PM Janaka Bandara <janakaud+apa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > PatternLayout ( > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/layouts.html#PatternLayout) > advertises this parameter syntax, to allow filtering undesired stack > frames from logged stacktraces: `%ex{filters(package,list)}` > > > ex|exception|throwable > > > > {filters(package,package,...)} > > > > Use {filters(packages)} where packages is a list of package names to > suppress matching stack frames from stack traces. > > > However on 2.17.1 (latest) when I use such a pattern: > > `<PatternLayout pattern="%d{ISO8601} %5p %c{1} %m%n%ex{filters(org.p2)}"/>` > > no filtering happens, and I still get stacktraces like: > > ``` > 2022-02-14T07:25:23,048 ERROR TestLog error > java.lang.IllegalStateException: Oh no > at org.p2.Foo.run(Foo.java:5) > at com.p1.Bar.run(Bar.java:7) > at org.p2.Bar.run(Bar.java:5) > at com.p1.Foo.run(Foo.java:7) > at TestLog.main(TestLog.java:11) > ``` > > > Per my understanding, above config should remove the two `at > org.p2...` frames/lines from the stacktrace. > > Turning off `alwaysWriteExceptions` makes no change. > > > Looking at the > `org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.ThrowableFormatOptions#newInstance(..)` > codebase I see that the `filters` parameter is parsed and loaded to > `ThrowableFormatOptions` properly; but in the actual > > `org.apache.logging.log4j.core.pattern.ThrowablePatternConverter#formatOption(..)` > I cannot find any stack frame filtering logic using `filters` config. > So to me it seems like `filters` functionality is not yet implemented > (although I could not find any documentation/discussions to back my > suspicion). > > > I would be happy to contribute a filtering implementation honoring the > already documented specification; however first I would like to > confirm if I'm correct so far, or if I have missed something. > > TIA! > > -- > Janaka Bandara > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org > >
