Why I don't create a separate logger for each package/class is because each special format is is associated with lot of sub packages, clasess and it will create a long list of loggers.
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Pradnya Gawade <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, I am having the issue described below, sorry for the long post but > I think that is required to better explain the problem. > > I want to separate out the logs in such a way that some special > packages, classes needs to go in specific log format and rest of the > logs will go in default format. I have created the multiple file, > Syslog appenders with all the required formats. But I am having > difficulty configuring in such a way that the log messages from > packages other than my special packages will go with the default > appender. Initially my idea was to map the basic outer package to all > the special appenders as well as to default appender, create a filter > for each special appender so it will only take the specific package > logs only. But the problem is that default appender takes all the log > messages. I can again implement a filter for the default appender so > it will take all the excluded log s only but probably it it will be > lot of processing unnecessarily, evaluating the same criteria again > and again for each logging request. Is there any way so I can > intercept each logging request such that I can decide which appender I > need this logger to map to (by implementing some java routine), put > the result in MDC context and make use of that result variable in the > configuration to associate the required appender (using if-else > syntax)? I saw that Sifting appender might be helpful in this scenario > but I don't know where I can put my processing logic to decide which > appender I want the logger to associate to so I can use its result as > discrminator. Any ideas? > > > Thanks, > Pradnya > _______________________________________________ Logback-user mailing list [email protected] http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
