No, I do not have a configuration, but the idea would be to setup a logging application that would be the receiver of logging sent out from 2 or more applications using a remoting appender. Basically the same idea as remote Syslog application.
Yes, it might be slow to log, but (other than the logging application crashing) should an alternative worth considering vs. the mutex. Of course the idea of the remoting appender becomes more attractive and robust once someone provides a WCF appender. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy Chastain -----Original Message----- From: Ron Grabowski [mailto:rongrabow...@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 18:44 To: Log4NET Dev Subject: Re: Name for MutexLock? Can you share a config snippet showing how to use the RemotingAppender like you've described? What happens when one of the apps goes down? I envision the InterProcessLock as a locking model used between two low/medium chatty apps that want to write to the same file that may or may not be running at the same time. ________________________________ From: Roy Chastain <r...@roychastain.org> To: Log4NET Dev <log4net-dev@logging.apache.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 9:25 AM Subject: RE: Name for MutexLock? I like InterProcessLock and would like to propose MultiProcessLock as my favorite. I HOPE that the documentation will indicate what a bad plan this is and that a remoteing appender etc might be a better plan. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy Chastain -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:47 To: log4net-dev@logging.apache.org Subject: Name for MutexLock? Hi, LOG4NET-164 introduced a new locking strategy for FileAppender which technically uses a System.Threading.Mutex with a name built from the log file's name. This should allow separate processes to share a log file without repeatedly opening and closing it. The main remaining issue is its name (apart from docs which will follow once the name is settled). Right now it is called MutexLock but that may not convey to users what this actually does - they'd need to know what a Mutex is in the first place. I'm notoriously bad at names so I'm asking here now. Names suggested in the JIRA ticket are "InterProcessLock", "SystemWideLock" and "GlobalLock". Stefan
