I tested the same snippet with log4j and it runs fast with javaw on windows xp (700ms). The versions were log4j 1.2.15; org.slf4j.api 1.15.11 and org.slf4j.log4j12 1.4.2
The slow configuration was: org.slf4j.api 1.15.11 and org.slf4j.log4j12 1.4.2 ch.qos.logback.classic, ch.qos.logback.core, ch.qos.logback.slf4j all in version 0.9.19. Peter Am 21.12.2011 um 17:53 schrieb ceki: > Thank you for the output of visualvm profiler. It looks like 90.4% of the > time is spent in java.io.PrintStream.write(int) called by > ch.qos.logback.core.joran.spi.ConsoleTarget. There is also some time spent in > java.io.IOException.<init>(String), i.e the constructor of IOException. > > In principle, the performance of log4j ConsoleAppender should be very > similar, although its execution path might be slightly shorter. > > Which version of log4j are you using? > > -- > Ceki > http://twitter.com/#!/ceki > > On 21.12.2011 16:04, Peter Kullmann wrote: >> I don't know what to do except perhaps warn against the usage of the console >> appender when running without a console on windows xp. >> >> I'm attaching the output of the visualvm profiler so that you can see where >> all the time is being spent. >> >> By the way, I think log4j doesn't have this problem. We were using log4j for >> years in much the same setups. >> >> Peter >> >> >> Am 21.12.2011 um 11:03 schrieb ceki: >> >>> On 21.12.2011 10:55, Peter Kullmann wrote: >>>> Hi Ceki, >>>> >>>> The problem manifests itself under windows xp. Windows 7 is much better. >>> >>> I don't see anything actionable to work with here. Ideas? >>> >>>> Peter >>> > > > _______________________________________________ > Logback-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user > _______________________________________________ Logback-user mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
