[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16997600#comment-16997600
]
Dan Armbrust commented on LOG4J2-2738:
--------------------------------------
No, it wouldn't, because the secondary log event isn't passing the same
parameters, so it isn't going to recurse. Its a completely unrelated log
message.
Not to say that it couldn't lead to an infinite loop, but it doesn't in my use
case.
If we really aren't allowed to use log4j in any code that is utilized in a
parametrized message, that's a pretty big restriction that is undocumented, as
far as I've seen.
I'll see if I can put together a simple example.
> Message "ERROR Recursive call to appender" needs more diagnostic information.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-2738
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-2738
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 2.12.1
> Reporter: Dan Armbrust
> Assignee: Ralph Goers
> Priority: Minor
>
> The class AppenderControl has logic that is intended to detect recursive
> calls to an appender.
>
> {code:java}
> // code placeholder
> @PerformanceSensitive
> private boolean isRecursiveCall() {
> if (recursive.get() != null) {
> appenderErrorHandlerMessage("Recursive call to appender ");
> return true;
> }
> return false;
> }
> {code}
> However, the logic behind this is flawed, leading to erroneous ERROR messages
> being printed on the console.
> In my use case, I have a log message being written, utilizing the
> ParameterizedMessage APIs. When log4j formats my message, it calls the
> toString method on the object being passed in. If that toString() call
> results in another log message being written, log4j logs this error, which I
> believe to be erroneous. Its not recursive... its just another log message
> that happens to be triggered by the construction of the first log message.
> This wouldn't lead to a recursive loop.
> This should probably be implemented with a depth counter, and only error if
> it really does look recursive (deeper than 10 calls, or some such value).
> Also, the error logged should REALLY include a stack trace, so this isn't
> such a PITA to track down if someone really does have a recursive logging
> call.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
