Re: Maximum backup index for RollingFileAppender
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Jostein Tveit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Dale King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> 12 is a hardcoded limit because this requires renames of all backup >> files which is expensive > > It would have been nice if log4cxx issued a warning or error > message if the value was set to a value outside the boundaries. Actually, it does output a message to its own internal logging mechanism. For obvious reasons Log4Cxx cannot log to itself, so has its own internal logging mechanism (LogLog) which outputs to stderr. If you look at stderr you should see a message that says: Large window sizes are not allowed. -- Dale King
Re: Maximum backup index for RollingFileAppender
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Peter Steele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would have been nice if some kind of renaming scheme was used that > was near zero-cost. For example, a date/time stamp... You can do rolling by date time and that is part of the file name, but then you lose the ability to delete older logs. -- Dale King
RE: Maximum backup index for RollingFileAppender
It would have been nice if some kind of renaming scheme was used that was near zero-cost. For example, a date/time stamp... -Original Message- From: Jostein Tveit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:42 PM To: Log4CXX User Subject: Re: Maximum backup index for RollingFileAppender "Dale King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 12 is a hardcoded limit because this requires renames of all backup > files which is expensive It would have been nice if log4cxx issued a warning or error message if the value was set to a value outside the boundaries. -- Jostein Tveit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
unit test fails
Hi All, I'am planing to use log4cxx 0.10.0 on Windows XP, SP2 and MS VC 8, SP1, Group Edition. I have loaded the necessary packages and compiling them, as described on the website, works perfectly well. When trying to run the unit tests, i.e. 'testsuite' and/or 'testsuite-standalone', the executables crash without any warning right after (or at the end) of 'TimeBasedRollingTest'. Any clou why this happens? Perhaps, is this known issue Cheers Stefan
