I wonder if it would be worthwhile to make a ModestLock that locks the
file for a few seconds after the last log in anticipation of another
log message. When recording a lot of messages you'd benefit from having
an exclusive lock during a lot of messages then when the system has
slowed down some (i.e. no messages in 2+ seconds) it releases the lock.
Maybe that time period would be need to be tweaked or configurable.

--- Matthew Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Just a warning though, in my experience with MinimalLock, it slows
> down
> execution of the program significantly (as log4net has to lock the
> file,
> write it, unlock it, repeat)
> 
> On 11/22/05, Georg Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > You can try to change the lock level:
> >
> > <lockingModel type="log4net.Appender.FileAppender+MinimalLock" />
> >
> > (This must be inserted in the config file in the section where you
> define
> > the RollingFileAppender).
> >
> >
> > Best regards
> > Georg
> > http://www.l4ndash.com - Log4Net Dashboard / Log Viewer
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sankalp
> > Sent: 22. november 2005 10:53
> > To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
> > Subject: Log4Net file locking
> >
> > Hi,
> > We wish to port our .NET windows application logging to Log4Net but
> are
> > facing a
> > problem. Our application dispays the log file in a rich text box so
> that
> > the
> > user can debug himself what all is happening in the application. We
> plan
> > to
> > user
> > RollingFileAppender so that logs can remain for certain period pf
> time.
> > However, there is some problem here. When we try reading the log
> file and
> > display it in the rich text box, then it says that the file is in
> use and
> > cant
> > be accessed. Log4Net is putting a lock on the file. I tried
> changing the
> > locking
> > level to Minimal Lock using a file Appender but even that didnt
> help as as
> > soon
> > as the log is written, we simultaneoulsy display it in the rich
> text box.
> > Pointers any one????
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 

Reply via email to