subject:"RE\: range filter\?"

Re: range filter?

2015-08-26 Thread Gary Gregory

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

> This is my main issue.  If someone, Remko maybe?, has a solution using
> composite and threshold please let me know as so far I have been unable to
> make it work using those.  My next step would be to write my own
> LevelRangeFilter.
>

I think a LevelRangeFilter is a good idea anyway, so Log4j should provide
one. Writing one is easy, it's docs will take longer to write well.

Gary

>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> > From: nic...@msn.com
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: range filter?
> > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:41:27 -0400
> >
> > Thanks for clarifying.
> >
> > My effort to try to get the composite + threshold filter working such
> that I can filter a single level so far has failed.  Here is my code:
> >
> > import org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager;
> > import org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger;
> > import org.apache.logging.log4j.Level;
> >
> > public class HelloWorld
> > {
> > static Logger log = LogManager.getLogger(HelloWorld.class.getName());
> >
> > public static void main(String[] args)
> > {
> >   System.out.println("Hello, World");
> >   log.info("hello this is an INFO  message");
> >   log.warn("hello this is a WARN message");
> >   log.debug("hello this is a DEBUG message");
> >   Level level = Level.getLevel("INFOM1");
> >   if (level == null)
> >  System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOM1");
> >   else
> > log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOM1 message");
> >   level = Level.getLevel("INFOP1");
> >   if (level == null)
> > System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOP1");
> >   else
> > log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOP1 message");
> > }
> > }
> >
> > Here is my configuration file:
> >
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >   
> > 
> >   
> > %d %p %c{1.} [%t] %m%n
> >   
> >   
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >   
> >   
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > 
> >
> > NOTE: The custom levels are not being found by the code as I'm seeing my
> messages to stdout that it couldn't find INFOM1 and INFOP1.
> >
> > Any suggestion on how to get filtering of a single level working with
> the composite filter + threshold filter?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:05:35 -0700
> > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >
> > > I apologize, you are correct. The level values do decrease.
> > >
> > > Regardless, your point about wanting to filter on essentially a single
> integer value makes sense.
> > >
> > > Ralph
> > >
> > > > On Aug 26, 2015, at 6:12 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm, I thought for log4j the threshold was less than or equal to
> the level.  For instance, if the threshold is INFO then INFO and less than,
> eg more critical like WARN ERROR and FATAL would match.  It's opposite in
> log4net.  Regardless, this is the issue I wanted to point out.  The
> stackoverflow article doesn't filter only INFO level, it seems it filters
> INFO and anything between INFO and WARN but not including WARN.
> > > >
> > > > If I want just a single level then I would like a way to specify
> that without me having to potentially go back and edit the configuration if
> someone decides to specify a custom level via configuration or code.  The
> LevelRangeFilter provides an easy mechanism for me to do this by specifying
> the same level for min and max.  I guess you're suggesting I could
> accomplish this via the composite filter and the threshold filter, however,
> I would have to define a custom level that is one less than or one more
> than the level I'm looking to capture so that I ensure I'm only getting
> that one level.  I will try this out, but it would be nice to have
> something like the LevelRangeFilter.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > >> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > > >> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:08:01 -0700
> >

RE: range filter?

2015-08-26 Thread Nicholas Duane

This is my main issue.  If someone, Remko maybe?, has a solution using 
composite and threshold please let me know as so far I have been unable to make 
it work using those.  My next step would be to write my own LevelRangeFilter.
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> From: nic...@msn.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> Subject: RE: range filter?
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:41:27 -0400
> 
> Thanks for clarifying.
> 
> My effort to try to get the composite + threshold filter working such that I 
> can filter a single level so far has failed.  Here is my code:
> 
> import org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager;
> import org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger;
> import org.apache.logging.log4j.Level;
> 
> public class HelloWorld
> { 
> static Logger log = LogManager.getLogger(HelloWorld.class.getName());
> 
> public static void main(String[] args)
> { 
>   System.out.println("Hello, World");
>   log.info("hello this is an INFO  message");
>   log.warn("hello this is a WARN message");
>   log.debug("hello this is a DEBUG message");
>   Level level = Level.getLevel("INFOM1");
>   if (level == null)
>  System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOM1");
>   else
> log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOM1 message");
>   level = Level.getLevel("INFOP1");
>   if (level == null)
> System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOP1");
>   else
> log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOP1 message");
> }
> }
> 
> Here is my configuration file:
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   
> %d %p %c{1.} [%t] %m%n
>   
>   
> 
> 
>   
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> NOTE: The custom levels are not being found by the code as I'm seeing my 
> messages to stdout that it couldn't find INFOM1 and INFOP1.
> 
> Any suggestion on how to get filtering of a single level working with the 
> composite filter + threshold filter?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
> > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:05:35 -0700
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > 
> > I apologize, you are correct. The level values do decrease.
> > 
> > Regardless, your point about wanting to filter on essentially a single 
> > integer value makes sense.
> > 
> > Ralph
> > 
> > > On Aug 26, 2015, at 6:12 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hmmm, I thought for log4j the threshold was less than or equal to the 
> > > level.  For instance, if the threshold is INFO then INFO and less than, 
> > > eg more critical like WARN ERROR and FATAL would match.  It's opposite in 
> > > log4net.  Regardless, this is the issue I wanted to point out.  The 
> > > stackoverflow article doesn't filter only INFO level, it seems it filters 
> > > INFO and anything between INFO and WARN but not including WARN.
> > > 
> > > If I want just a single level then I would like a way to specify that 
> > > without me having to potentially go back and edit the configuration if 
> > > someone decides to specify a custom level via configuration or code.  The 
> > > LevelRangeFilter provides an easy mechanism for me to do this by 
> > > specifying the same level for min and max.  I guess you're suggesting I 
> > > could accomplish this via the composite filter and the threshold filter, 
> > > however, I would have to define a custom level that is one less than or 
> > > one more than the level I'm looking to capture so that I ensure I'm only 
> > > getting that one level.  I will try this out, but it would be nice to 
> > > have something like the LevelRangeFilter.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > > 
> > >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > >> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > >> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:08:01 -0700
> > >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >> 
> > >> No. If the custom level was 1 greater than INFO, then yes. In that case 
> > >> you would specify your custom level instead of WARN as the level on the 
> > >> first ThresholdFilter.
> > >> 
> > >> Ralph
> > >> 
> > >>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:39 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > >>> 
> > >>> What if someone defined a custom level one less than

RE: range filter?

2015-08-26 Thread Nicholas Duane

Thanks for clarifying.

My effort to try to get the composite + threshold filter working such that I 
can filter a single level so far has failed.  Here is my code:

import org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager;
import org.apache.logging.log4j.Logger;
import org.apache.logging.log4j.Level;

public class HelloWorld
{ 
static Logger log = LogManager.getLogger(HelloWorld.class.getName());

public static void main(String[] args)
{ 
  System.out.println("Hello, World");
  log.info("hello this is an INFO  message");
  log.warn("hello this is a WARN message");
  log.debug("hello this is a DEBUG message");
  Level level = Level.getLevel("INFOM1");
  if (level == null)
 System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOM1");
  else
log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOM1 message");
  level = Level.getLevel("INFOP1");
  if (level == null)
System.out.println("Didn't find level INFOP1");
  else
log.log(level, "hello this is an INFOP1 message");
}
}

Here is my configuration file:



  


  
  

  
%d %p %c{1.} [%t] %m%n
  
  


  

  
  

  



  


NOTE: The custom levels are not being found by the code as I'm seeing my 
messages to stdout that it couldn't find INFOM1 and INFOP1.

Any suggestion on how to get filtering of a single level working with the 
composite filter + threshold filter?

Thanks,
Nick

> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 07:05:35 -0700
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> I apologize, you are correct. The level values do decrease.
> 
> Regardless, your point about wanting to filter on essentially a single 
> integer value makes sense.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> > On Aug 26, 2015, at 6:12 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > 
> > Hmmm, I thought for log4j the threshold was less than or equal to the 
> > level.  For instance, if the threshold is INFO then INFO and less than, eg 
> > more critical like WARN ERROR and FATAL would match.  It's opposite in 
> > log4net.  Regardless, this is the issue I wanted to point out.  The 
> > stackoverflow article doesn't filter only INFO level, it seems it filters 
> > INFO and anything between INFO and WARN but not including WARN.
> > 
> > If I want just a single level then I would like a way to specify that 
> > without me having to potentially go back and edit the configuration if 
> > someone decides to specify a custom level via configuration or code.  The 
> > LevelRangeFilter provides an easy mechanism for me to do this by specifying 
> > the same level for min and max.  I guess you're suggesting I could 
> > accomplish this via the composite filter and the threshold filter, however, 
> > I would have to define a custom level that is one less than or one more 
> > than the level I'm looking to capture so that I ensure I'm only getting 
> > that one level.  I will try this out, but it would be nice to have 
> > something like the LevelRangeFilter.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> > 
> >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> >> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:08:01 -0700
> >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >> 
> >> No. If the custom level was 1 greater than INFO, then yes. In that case 
> >> you would specify your custom level instead of WARN as the level on the 
> >> first ThresholdFilter.
> >> 
> >> Ralph
> >> 
> >>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:39 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> What if someone defined a custom level one less than INFO?  Wouldn't that 
> >>> end up in the log also?
> >>> Thanks,Nick
> >>> 
> >>>  Original message 
> >>> From: Ralph Goers 
> >>> Date: 08/25/2015  10:28 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> >>> To: Log4J Users List 
> >>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >>> 
> >>> I just did.
> >>> 
> >>> Ralph
> >>> 
> >>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
> >>>> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
> >>>> Thanks,Nick
> >>>> 
> >>>>  Original message 
> >>>> From: Remko Popma 
> >>>> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> >

Re: range filter?

2015-08-26 Thread Ralph Goers

I apologize, you are correct. The level values do decrease.

Regardless, your point about wanting to filter on essentially a single integer 
value makes sense.

Ralph

> On Aug 26, 2015, at 6:12 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> Hmmm, I thought for log4j the threshold was less than or equal to the level.  
> For instance, if the threshold is INFO then INFO and less than, eg more 
> critical like WARN ERROR and FATAL would match.  It's opposite in log4net.  
> Regardless, this is the issue I wanted to point out.  The stackoverflow 
> article doesn't filter only INFO level, it seems it filters INFO and anything 
> between INFO and WARN but not including WARN.
> 
> If I want just a single level then I would like a way to specify that without 
> me having to potentially go back and edit the configuration if someone 
> decides to specify a custom level via configuration or code.  The 
> LevelRangeFilter provides an easy mechanism for me to do this by specifying 
> the same level for min and max.  I guess you're suggesting I could accomplish 
> this via the composite filter and the threshold filter, however, I would have 
> to define a custom level that is one less than or one more than the level I'm 
> looking to capture so that I ensure I'm only getting that one level.  I will 
> try this out, but it would be nice to have something like the 
> LevelRangeFilter.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:08:01 -0700
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> 
>> No. If the custom level was 1 greater than INFO, then yes. In that case you 
>> would specify your custom level instead of WARN as the level on the first 
>> ThresholdFilter.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:39 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What if someone defined a custom level one less than INFO?  Wouldn't that 
>>> end up in the log also?
>>> Thanks,Nick
>>> 
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Ralph Goers 
>>> Date: 08/25/2015  10:28 PM  (GMT-07:00)
>>> To: Log4J Users List 
>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>> 
>>> I just did.
>>> 
>>> Ralph
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
>>>> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
>>>> Thanks,Nick
>>>> 
>>>>  Original message 
>>>> From: Remko Popma 
>>>> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00)
>>>> To: Log4J Users List 
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ 
>>>> INFO level events to an appender".
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
>>>> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
>>>> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
>>>> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet 
>>>> another appender."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>>>>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. 
>>>>> The third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and 
>>>>> debug.  So the end result is the only events that will get logged will be 
>>>>> those at INFO level.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>>>>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>>>>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting 
>>>>> any other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will 
>>>>> be used to see if the event passes that.
>>>> 
>>>

RE: range filter?

2015-08-26 Thread Nicholas Duane

Hmmm, I thought for log4j the threshold was less than or equal to the level.  
For instance, if the threshold is INFO then INFO and less than, eg more 
critical like WARN ERROR and FATAL would match.  It's opposite in log4net.  
Regardless, this is the issue I wanted to point out.  The stackoverflow article 
doesn't filter only INFO level, it seems it filters INFO and anything between 
INFO and WARN but not including WARN.
 
If I want just a single level then I would like a way to specify that without 
me having to potentially go back and edit the configuration if someone decides 
to specify a custom level via configuration or code.  The LevelRangeFilter 
provides an easy mechanism for me to do this by specifying the same level for 
min and max.  I guess you're suggesting I could accomplish this via the 
composite filter and the threshold filter, however, I would have to define a 
custom level that is one less than or one more than the level I'm looking to 
capture so that I ensure I'm only getting that one level.  I will try this out, 
but it would be nice to have something like the LevelRangeFilter.
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:08:01 -0700
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> No. If the custom level was 1 greater than INFO, then yes. In that case you 
> would specify your custom level instead of WARN as the level on the first 
> ThresholdFilter.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> > On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:39 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > 
> > What if someone defined a custom level one less than INFO?  Wouldn't that 
> > end up in the log also?
> > Thanks,Nick
> > 
> >  Original message 
> > From: Ralph Goers 
> > Date: 08/25/2015  10:28 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> > To: Log4J Users List 
> > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > 
> > I just did.
> > 
> > Ralph
> > 
> >> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >> 
> >> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
> >> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
> >> Thanks,Nick
> >> 
> >>  Original message 
> >> From: Remko Popma 
> >> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> >> To: Log4J Users List 
> >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >> 
> >> 
> >> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ 
> >> INFO level events to an appender".
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
> >> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
> >> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
> >> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet 
> >> another appender."
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
> >>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. 
> >>> The third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and 
> >>> debug.  So the end result is the only events that will get logged will be 
> >>> those at INFO level.
> >> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
> >>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
> >>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting 
> >>> any other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will 
> >>> be used to see if the event passes that.
> >> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>> Ralph
> >> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >> 
> >>>> 
> >> 
> >>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration 
> >>>> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the 
> >>>> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
> >> 
> >>>> 
> >> 
> >>

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

No. If the custom level was 1 greater than INFO, then yes. In that case you 
would specify your custom level instead of WARN as the level on the first 
ThresholdFilter.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:39 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> What if someone defined a custom level one less than INFO?  Wouldn't that end 
> up in the log also?
> Thanks,Nick
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Ralph Goers 
> Date: 08/25/2015  10:28 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> To: Log4J Users List 
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> 
> I just did.
> 
> Ralph
> 
>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>> 
>> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
>> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
>> Thanks,Nick
>> 
>>  Original message ----
>> From: Remko Popma 
>> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00)
>> To: Log4J Users List 
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> 
>> 
>> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ 
>> INFO level events to an appender".
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
>> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
>> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
>> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet 
>> another appender."
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The 
>>> third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So 
>>> the end result is the only events that will get logged will be those at 
>>> INFO level.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any 
>>> other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used 
>>> to see if the event passes that.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> Ralph
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration 
>>>> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the 
>>>> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>  
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> >>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>  >>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>>>  >>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>   
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>   >>> onMismatch="DENY"/>
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>>>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>>>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>>>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>>>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>>>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top 
>>>> of that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe 
>>>> just 1 away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the 
>>>> appender.  How would you do that?
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin 
>>>> and levelMax to the same value.
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>> 
>>>> Nick
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> Subject: Re: r

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

Right, the hard part is explaining how to use it, combine it, and how put all 
the puzzle pieces together. 
Gary 

 Original message 
From: Ralph Goers  
Date: 08/25/2015  21:28  (GMT-08:00) 
To: Log4J Users List  
Subject: Re: range filter? 

Why not? It would take about 10 minutes to implement. In fact, I am sure it 
would take more time to document it than to implement it.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:42 PM, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> 
> I've got to say that I use MarkerFilters all the time, but I still need to
> refresh my brain when I've not used them in a while.
> 
> If providing a LevelRangeFilter would be less confusing, then perhaps we
> should write one.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration
>> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the
>> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
>> 
>>   
>> 
>>  > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>   > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>   > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>    
>> 
>>    > onMismatch="DENY"/>
>> 
>> 
>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the
>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand
>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite
>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the
>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of
>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>> 
>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top
>> of that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe
>> just 1 away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the
>> appender.  How would you do that?
>> 
>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin
>> and levelMax to the same value.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>> 
>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>> 
>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer
>> works with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if
>> I would edit my answer (which I did).
>>> 
>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The
>> question is if it also works with custom levels.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
>> work.
>>>> 
>>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
>> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
>> filter a specific range of levels.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you try something similar to this
>>>>> 
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>>>>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.
>> Here's
>>>>>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The
>>>>>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
>>>>>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
>>>>>&

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

What if someone defined a custom level one less than INFO?  Wouldn't that end 
up in the log also?
Thanks,Nick

 Original message 
From: Ralph Goers 
Date: 08/25/2015  10:28 PM  (GMT-07:00)
To: Log4J Users List 
Subject: Re: range filter?

I just did.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>
> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
> Thanks,Nick
>
>  Original message 
> From: Remko Popma 
> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00)
> To: Log4J Users List 
> Subject: Re: range filter?
>
>
> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ INFO 
> level events to an appender".
>
>
>
> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another 
> appender."
>
>
>
> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>
>>
>
>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The 
>> third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So 
>> the end result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO 
>> level.
>
>>
>
>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any 
>> other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used 
>> to see if the event passes that.
>
>>
>
>> Ralph
>
>>
>
>>
>
>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>
>>>
>
>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
>>> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration. 
>>>  Here is a snippet from that post:
>
>>>
>
>>>   
>
>>>
>
>>>  >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>
>>>
>
>>>   >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>
>>>   >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>>>> onMismatch="DENY"/>
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>
>>>
>
>>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
>>> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
>>> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the 
>>> appender.  How would you do that?
>
>>>
>
>>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin 
>>> and levelMax to the same value.
>
>>>
>
>>> Thanks,
>
>>> Nick
>
>>>
>
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>
>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>
>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>
>>>>
>
>>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>>> would edit my answer (which I did).
>
>>>>
>
>>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>>> is if it also works with custom levels.
>
>>>>
>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>
>>>>
>
>>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>
>>>>>
>
>>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

Why not? It would take about 10 minutes to implement. In fact, I am sure it 
would take more time to document it than to implement it.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:42 PM, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> 
> I've got to say that I use MarkerFilters all the time, but I still need to
> refresh my brain when I've not used them in a while.
> 
> If providing a LevelRangeFilter would be less confusing, then perhaps we
> should write one.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration
>> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the
>> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
>> 
>>   
>> 
>>  > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>   > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>   > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>
>> 
>>> onMismatch="DENY"/>
>> 
>> 
>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the
>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand
>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite
>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the
>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of
>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>> 
>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top
>> of that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe
>> just 1 away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the
>> appender.  How would you do that?
>> 
>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin
>> and levelMax to the same value.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>> 
>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>> 
>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer
>> works with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if
>> I would edit my answer (which I did).
>>> 
>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The
>> question is if it also works with custom levels.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
>> work.
>>>> 
>>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
>> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
>> filter a specific range of levels.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you try something similar to this
>>>>> 
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>>>>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.
>> Here's
>>>>>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The
>>>>>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
>>>>>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
>>>>>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
>>>>>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to
>> one
>>>>>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to anothe

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

I just did.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 9:12 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some 
> more.  Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
> Thanks,Nick
> 
>  Original message 
> From: Remko Popma  
> Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00) 
> To: Log4J Users List  
> Subject: Re: range filter? 
> 
> 
> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ INFO 
> level events to an appender". 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another 
> appender."
> 
> 
> 
> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> 
>> 
> 
>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The 
>> third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So 
>> the end result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO 
>> level.
> 
>> 
> 
>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any 
>> other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used 
>> to see if the event passes that.
> 
>> 
> 
>> Ralph
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
>>> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration. 
>>>  Here is a snippet from that post:
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>   
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>  >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>   >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
> 
>>>   >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>>> onMismatch="DENY"/>
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
>>> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
>>> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the 
>>> appender.  How would you do that?
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin 
>>> and levelMax to the same value.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Thanks,
> 
>>> Nick
> 
>>> 
> 
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> 
>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> 
>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
> 
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>>> would edit my answer (which I did).  
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>>> is if it also works with custom levels. 
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>>>> 
> 
>>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
>>>>> 
> 
>>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do 
>>>>> something similar to me.  I see the last c

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

That's exactly the use case I'm looking for.  I'll have to study it some more.  
Can you give me an example which filters out everything but INFO?
Thanks,Nick

 Original message 
From: Remko Popma  
Date: 08/25/2015  9:06 PM  (GMT-07:00) 
To: Log4J Users List  
Subject: Re: range filter? 


The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ INFO 
level events to an appender". 



I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to achieve 
the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going 
to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender. 
All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender."



Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.



Sent from my iPhone



> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:

> 

> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter will 
> deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The third 
> filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So the end 
> result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO level.

> 

> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or deny 
> then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any other 
> filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used to see 
> if the event passes that.

> 

> Ralph

> 

> 

>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

>> 

>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
>> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration.  
>> Here is a snippet from that post:

>> 

>>  

>> 

>> >onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>

>> 

>>  >onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>

>>  >onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>

>> 

>>   

>> 

>>   

>> 

>> 

>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?

>> 

>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
>> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
>> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the appender. 
>>  How would you do that?

>> 

>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin and 
>> levelMax to the same value.

>> 

>> Thanks,

>> Nick

>> 

>>> Subject: Re: range filter?

>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com

>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900

>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org

>>> 

>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>> would edit my answer (which I did).  

>>> 

>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>> is if it also works with custom levels. 

>>> 

>>> Sent from my iPhone

>>> 

>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

>>>> 

>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do 
>>>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it 
>>>> doesn't work.

>>>> 

>>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However 
>>>> the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels 
>>>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to 
>>>> filter a specific range of levels.

>>>> 

>>>> Thanks,

>>>> Nick

>>>> 

>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900

>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?

>>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com

>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org

>>>>> 

>>>>> Can you try something similar to this

>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

I've got to say that I use MarkerFilters all the time, but I still need to
refresh my brain when I've not used them in a while.

If providing a LevelRangeFilter would be less confusing, then perhaps we
should write one.

Gary

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration
> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the
> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
>
>
>
> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>
>  onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>  onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>
> 
>
>  onMismatch="DENY"/>
>
>
> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the
> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand
> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite
> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the
> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of
> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>
> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top
> of that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe
> just 1 away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the
> appender.  How would you do that?
>
> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin
> and levelMax to the same value.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >
> > You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer
> works with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if
> I would edit my answer (which I did).
> >
> > So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The
> question is if it also works with custom levels.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
> work.
> > >
> > > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
> filter a specific range of levels.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> > >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> > >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >>
> > >> Can you try something similar to this
> > >>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> > >> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> > >>
> > >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.
> Here's
> > >>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> > >>>
> > >>> 
> > >>>  
> > >>>  ...
> > >>>   
> > >>>   
> > >>>  
> > >>>  
> > >>>   
> > >>> 
> > >>>
> > >>> The
> > >>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> > >>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> > >>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> > >>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to
> one
> > >>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> > >>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Nick
> > >>>
> > >>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > >>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > >>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >>>>
> > >>>> When you ge

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Remko Popma

I see. I didn't know you could nest filters inside an AppenderRef. Nice!

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2015/08/26, at 12:21, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> 
> If you only want info events then you should do
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 
> 
> If you want to illustrate the other use case you would need a configuration 
> like
> 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
>  
>  
>
>  
> 
> 
>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Remko Popma  wrote:
>> 
>> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ 
>> INFO level events to an appender". 
>> 
>> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
>> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
>> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
>> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet 
>> another appender."
>> 
>> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The 
>>> third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So 
>>> the end result is the only events that will get logged will be those at 
>>> INFO level.
>>> 
>>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any 
>>> other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used 
>>> to see if the event passes that.
>>> 
>>> Ralph
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration 
>>>> is saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the 
>>>> configuration.  Here is a snippet from that post:
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>   >>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>>> 
>>>>>>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>>>>>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>>>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>>>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>>>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>>>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>>>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>>>> 
>>>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top 
>>>> of that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe 
>>>> just 1 away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the 
>>>> appender.  How would you do that?
>>>> 
>>>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin 
>>>> and levelMax to the same value.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>>>> would edit my answer (which I did).  
>>>>> 
>>>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>>>> is if it also works with custom levels. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do 
>>>>>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it 
>>>>>> doesn'

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

If you only want info events then you should do


  
  


If you want to illustrate the other use case you would need a configuration like


  
  
  
  

  
  

  


> On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Remko Popma  wrote:
> 
> The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ INFO 
> level events to an appender". 
> 
> I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to 
> achieve the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE 
> events going to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to 
> another appender. All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another 
> appender."
> 
> Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>> 
>> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter 
>> will deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The 
>> third filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So 
>> the end result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO 
>> level.
>> 
>> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
>> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or 
>> deny then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any 
>> other filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used 
>> to see if the event passes that.
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
>>> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration. 
>>>  Here is a snippet from that post:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>> 
>>> >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>> >> onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>>> 
>>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
>>> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
>>> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the 
>>> appender.  How would you do that?
>>> 
>>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin 
>>> and levelMax to the same value.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick
>>> 
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>>> would edit my answer (which I did).  
>>>> 
>>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>>> is if it also works with custom levels. 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do 
>>>>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it 
>>>>> doesn't work.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However 
>>>>> the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels 
>>>>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to 
>>>>> filter a specific range of levels.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Nick
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>>>>

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Remko Popma

The StackOverflow link was an answer to the question "how to send _only_ INFO 
level events to an appender". 

I thought it would illustrate how filters combinations could be used to achieve 
the original request: "I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going 
to one appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender. 
All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender."

Seemed to me to be a similar use case to the SO question.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2015/08/26, at 11:44, Ralph Goers  wrote:
> 
> I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter will 
> deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The third 
> filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So the end 
> result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO level.
> 
> The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
> result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or deny 
> then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any other 
> filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used to see 
> if the event passes that.
> 
> Ralph
> 
> 
>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>> 
>> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
>> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration.  
>> Here is a snippet from that post:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>  > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>>  > onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>> 
>>   
>> 
>>   
>> 
>> 
>> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the 
>> third says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand 
>> those in isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite 
>> would handle this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the 
>> CompositeFilter work?  Does it try to match on each filter in the list of 
>> stop as soon as it gets a DENY?
>> 
>> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
>> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
>> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the appender. 
>>  How would you do that?
>> 
>> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin and 
>> levelMax to the same value.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>> 
>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>> 
>>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>>> would edit my answer (which I did).  
>>> 
>>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question 
>>> is if it also works with custom levels. 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do 
>>>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it 
>>>> doesn't work.
>>>> 
>>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However 
>>>> the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels 
>>>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to 
>>>> filter a specific range of levels.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> Can you try something similar to this
>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>>>>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
>>>>>> the current configuration I tested with

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

I am not sure why Remko advised you to do it this way.  The first filter will 
deny Warn, error and fatal making the next two filters redundant. The third 
filter will accept events at level info and deny trace and debug.  So the end 
result is the only events that will get logged will be those at INFO level.

The composite filter really just wraps other filters and returns whatever 
result they generate. For example, if the first filter returns accept or deny 
then that value will be returned as the result without consulting any other 
filters. If the result is neutral then the second filter will be used to see if 
the event passes that.

Ralph


> On Aug 25, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
> saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration.  
> Here is a snippet from that post:
> 
>   
> 
>   onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
> 
>onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
>onMismatch="NEUTRAL"/>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
> 
> The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the third 
> says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand those in 
> isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite would handle 
> this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the CompositeFilter work?  
> Does it try to match on each filter in the list of stop as soon as it gets a 
> DENY?
> 
> What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
> that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
> away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the appender.  
> How would you do that?
> 
> How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin and 
> levelMax to the same value.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> 
>> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
>> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I 
>> would edit my answer (which I did).  
>> 
>> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question is 
>> if it also works with custom levels. 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
>>> similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
>>> 
>>> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However 
>>> the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater 
>>> than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a 
>>> specific range of levels.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick
>>> 
>>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> Can you try something similar to this
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>>>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
>>>>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ...
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The
>>>>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
>>>>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
>>>>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
>>>>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
>>>>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
>>>>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Nick
>>>>> 
>>>>&

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

Maybe.  However, I'm having a hard time following what the configuration is 
saying and thus have no idea what I would need to put in the configuration.  
Here is a snippet from that post:
 
   

  

   
   
   





The top three seem as if they would deny warn, error and fatal, yet the third 
says it accepts info, warn, error and fatal.  And while I understand those in 
isolation, I think, I have no idea how the  composite would handle 
this.  Why are the first three needed?  How does the CompositeFilter work?  
Does it try to match on each filter in the list of stop as soon as it gets a 
DENY?
 
What if I wanted to setup a filter which just accepted WARN?  And on top of 
that ensure that if anyone defined any custom levels which are maybe just 1 
away from WARN in either direction that those don't make it in the appender.  
How would you do that?
 
How I did this with the log4net LevelRangeFilter was to set the levelMin and 
levelMax to the same value.
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:12:29 +0900
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works 
> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I would 
> edit my answer (which I did).  
> 
> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question is 
> if it also works with custom levels. 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
> > similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
> > 
> > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However 
> > the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater 
> > than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a 
> > specific range of levels.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> > 
> >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >> 
> >> Can you try something similar to this
> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> >> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> >> 
> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> >>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  
> >>>  ...
> >>>   
> >>>   
> >>>  
> >>>  
> >>>   
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> The
> >>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> >>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> >>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> >>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> >>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> >>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> >>> 
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Nick
> >>> 
> >>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> >>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >>>> 
> >>>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
> >>>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Gary
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers  >>>> 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
> >>>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Ralph
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> >>> log4net
> >>>&g

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

By the way, let me say that I'm surprisingly delighted by the quickness of 
responses and level of interest in solving these issues.  THANK YOU.  I guess 
after posting a few messages on the log4net mailing list and getting no 
responses I wasn't too hopeful about getting responses to my log4j questions.  
I guess there is a big difference in support between the two products?
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:37:18 -0700
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> Ah, yes, sorry, I had not read it in detail. It would be nice to expand the
> unit test I just committed with a more complex scenario.
> 
> Could this use better docs or a FAQ entry?
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Remko Popma  wrote:
> 
> > You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works
> > with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I
> > would edit my answer (which I did).
> >
> > So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question
> > is if it also works with custom levels.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
> > something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
> > work.
> > >
> > > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
> > However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
> > greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
> > filter a specific range of levels.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> > >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> > >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >>
> > >> Can you try something similar to this
> > >>
> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> > >> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> > >>
> > >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> > >>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> > >>>
> > >>> 
> > >>>  
> > >>>  ...
> > >>>   
> > >>>   
> > >>>  
> > >>>  
> > >>>   
> > >>> 
> > >>>
> > >>> The
> > >>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> > >>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> > >>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> > >>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> > >>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> > >>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Nick
> > >>>
> > >>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > >>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> > >>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >>>>
> > >>>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition
> > to
> > >>>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Gary
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers <
> > ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should
> > should
> > >>>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ralph
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane 
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

Ah, yes, sorry, I had not read it in detail. It would be nice to expand the
unit test I just committed with a more complex scenario.

Could this use better docs or a FAQ entry?

Gary

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Remko Popma  wrote:

> You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works
> with a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I
> would edit my answer (which I did).
>
> So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question
> is if it also works with custom levels.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
> work.
> >
> > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
> filter a specific range of levels.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> >> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >>
> >> Can you try something similar to this
> >>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> >> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> >>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>  
> >>>  ...
> >>>   
> >>>   
> >>>  
> >>>  
> >>>   
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> The
> >>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> >>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> >>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> >>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> >>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> >>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Nick
> >>>
> >>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> >>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
> >>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition
> to
> >>>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> >>>>
> >>>> Gary
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> >>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should
> should
> >>>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ralph
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane 
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> >>> log4net
> >>>>> and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> >>>>> wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> >>>>> accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
> >>> accomplished
> >>>>> with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Nick
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> >>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> >>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> >>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> >>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> >>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> >>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> >>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

I should also point out that if you look at the documentation you will see that 
the default value for onMisMatch is “Deny”. So your first filter tests the log 
level and no matter what the level is it will discard the event.

Ralph

> On Aug 25, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's 
> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> 
> 
>  
>  ...
>   
>   
>  
>  
>   
> 
> 
> The
> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events 
> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send 
> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For 
> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one 
> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.  
> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> 
>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
>> 
>> Gary
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
>>> 
>>> Ralph
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in log4net
>>> and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
>>> wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
>>> accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be accomplished
>>> with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

From the manual - "This filter returns the onMatch result if the level in the 
LogEvent is the same or more specific than the configured level and the 
onMismatch value otherwise.”

So if you have 


  

Then the first filter should allow Debug, Info, Warn, Error, and Fatal through, 
discarding Trace events.  The second filter will deny Warn, Error and Fatal 
events, allowing Debug and Info to continue to be filtered. If you want them to 
be unconditionally processed regardless of other filters then set the 
onMisMatch to ACCEPT.

Ralph



> On Aug 25, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
> similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
> 
> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However the 
> ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater than 
> or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a specific 
> range of levels.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> 
>> Can you try something similar to this
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>> 
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>> 
>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
>>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  ...
>>>   
>>>   
>>>  
>>>  
>>>   
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The
>>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
>>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
>>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
>>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
>>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
>>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick
>>> 
>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
>>>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
>>>> 
>>>> Gary
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers >>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
>>>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
>>> log4net
>>>>> and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
>>>>> wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
>>>>> accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
>>> accomplished
>>>>> with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Nick
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>> 
>>> 
>

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Remko Popma

You misread the comment. The commentor basically told me the answer works with 
a minor change, and that he would mark the question as "done" if I would edit 
my answer (which I did).  

So the answer works and seems to apply to your use case, no? The question is if 
it also works with custom levels. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2015/08/26, at 8:49, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
> similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
> 
> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However the 
> ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater than 
> or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a specific 
> range of levels.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> 
>> Can you try something similar to this
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>> 
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
>>> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  ...
>>>   
>>>   
>>>  
>>>  
>>>   
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The
>>> use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
>>> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
>>> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
>>> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
>>> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
>>> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick
>>> 
>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
>>>> Subject: Re: range filter?
>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
>>>> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
>>>> 
>>>> Gary
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers >>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
>>>>> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
>>> log4net
>>>>> and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
>>>>> wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
>>>>> accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
>>> accomplished
>>>>> with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Nick
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

Hm... maybe we need
a org.apache.logging.log4j.Level.isInRange(Level, Level) method to help
implement this filter...

Gary

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Gary Gregory 
wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
>
>> Basically I need the same functionality of the LevelRangeFilter in
>> log4net, but of course in log4j2.
>>
>
> "Patches welcome" is something I often say ;-)
>
> Gary
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>>
>> > From: nic...@msn.com
>> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> > Subject: RE: range filter?
>> > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:49:48 -0400
>> >
>> > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
>> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
>> work.
>> >
>> > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
>> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
>> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
>> filter a specific range of levels.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Nick
>> >
>> > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
>> > > Subject: Re: range filter?
>> > > From: remko.po...@gmail.com
>> > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> > >
>> > > Can you try something similar to this
>> > >
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
>> > > and see if that works with custom levels as well?
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.
>> Here's
>> > > > the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>> > > >
>> > > > 
>> > > >   
>> > > >   ...
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >   
>> > > >   
>> > > >
>> > > > 
>> > > >
>> > > > The
>> > > >  use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of
>> events
>> > > > to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will
>> send
>> > > > all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
>> > > > instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to
>> one
>> > > > appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another
>> appender.
>> > > > All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another
>> appender.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Nick
>> > > >
>> > > > > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
>> > > > > Subject: Re: range filter?
>> > > > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
>> > > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> > > > >
>> > > > > When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice
>> addition to
>> > > > > the FAQ with a description of your use case.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Gary
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers <
>> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter
>> should should
>> > > > > > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set
>> appropriately.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Ralph
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane 
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on
>> in
>> > > > log4net
>> > > > > > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.
>> Just
>> > > > > > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that
>> will
>> > > > > > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
>> > > > accomplished
>> > > > > > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
>> >

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

> Basically I need the same functionality of the LevelRangeFilter in
> log4net, but of course in log4j2.
>

"Patches welcome" is something I often say ;-)

Gary


> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> > From: nic...@msn.com
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: range filter?
> > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:49:48 -0400
> >
> > Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do
> something similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't
> work.
> >
> > There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.
> However the ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels
> greater than or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to
> filter a specific range of levels.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> > > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >
> > > Can you try something similar to this
> > >
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> > > and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.
> Here's
> > > > the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >   
> > > >   ...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >   
> > > >   
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > The
> > > >  use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of
> events
> > > > to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> > > > all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> > > > instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to
> one
> > > > appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> > > > All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > > > > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > > > > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice
> addition to
> > > > > the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should
> should
> > > > > > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set
> appropriately.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ralph
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane 
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> > > > log4net
> > > > > > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.
> Just
> > > > > > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that
> will
> > > > > > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
> > > > accomplished
> > > > > > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Nick
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> -
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > > > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > > > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > > > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > > > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > > > Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > > > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
>



-- 
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

Basically I need the same functionality of the LevelRangeFilter in log4net, but 
of course in log4j2.
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> From: nic...@msn.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> Subject: RE: range filter?
> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:49:48 -0400
> 
> Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
> similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
>  
> There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However the 
> ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater than 
> or equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a specific 
> range of levels.
>  
> Thanks,
> Nick
>  
> > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > 
> > Can you try something similar to this
> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> > and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > 
> > > I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> > > the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> > >
> > > 
> > >   
> > >   ...
> > >
> > >
> > >   
> > >   
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > The
> > >  use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> > > to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> > > all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> > > instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> > > appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> > > All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > > > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
> > > > the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> > > >
> > > > Gary
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers  > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should 
> > > > > should
> > > > > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ralph
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> > > log4net
> > > > > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> > > > > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> > > > > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
> > > accomplished
> > > > > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Nick
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > > Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > >
> > >
>

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

Thanks.  I checked out the link.  It seems they were trying to do something 
similar to me.  I see the last comment on that is that it doesn't work.
 
There is another post afterwards which uses the ThresholdFilter.  However the 
ThresholdFilter won't work as that allows, or denys, all levels greater than or 
equal to or less than or equal to the level.  I need to filter a specific range 
of levels.
 
Thanks,
Nick
 
> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:27:04 +0900
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: remko.po...@gmail.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> Can you try something similar to this
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
> and see if that works with custom levels as well?
> 
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> > I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> > the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
> >
> > 
> >   
> >   ...
> >
> >
> >   
> >   
> >
> > 
> >
> > The
> >  use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> > to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> > all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> > instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> > appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> > All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> > >
> > > When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
> > > the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
> > > > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> > > >
> > > > Ralph
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> > log4net
> > > > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> > > > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> > > > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
> > accomplished
> > > > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Nick
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >
> >

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Remko Popma

Can you try something similar to this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24695133/log4j2-filter-particular-level-in-apender/24697002#24697002
and see if that works with custom levels as well?

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:

> I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's
> the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:
>
> 
>   
>   ...
>
>
>   
>   
>
> 
>
> The
>  use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events
> to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send
> all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For
> instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one
> appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.
> All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
> > Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> > Subject: Re: range filter?
> > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> >
> > When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
> > the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
> > > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> > >
> > > Ralph
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in
> log4net
> > > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> > > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> > > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be
> accomplished
> > > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>

RE: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Nicholas Duane

I've tried a couple different combinations and so far no luck.  Here's 
the current configuration I tested with which doesn't work:


  
  ...
   
   
  
  
   


The
 use case for why I want such a filter is to forward a range of events 
to an appender.  The threshold filter won't work because it will send 
all events matching a certain level and lower to the appender.  For 
instance, I might want all DEBUG, TRACE and VERBOSE events going to one 
appender.  All INFO, ERROR and WARN events going to another appender.  
All BUSINESS events (my custom) level, going to yet another appender.

Thanks,
Nick

> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:17:44 -0700
> Subject: Re: range filter?
> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com
> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
> 
> When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
> the FAQ with a description of your use case.
> 
> Gary
> 
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers 
> wrote:
> 
> > I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
> > work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in log4net
> > and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> > wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> > accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be accomplished
> > with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Gary Gregory

When you get it working, it sounds like it would make a nice addition to
the FAQ with a description of your use case.

Gary

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:

> I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should
> work provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> > On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> >
> > I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in log4net
> and it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just
> wondering if there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will
> accomplish the same?  I was wondering whether this could be accomplished
> with the CompositeFilter with two ThresholdFilter?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition

JUnit in Action, Second Edition 
Spring Batch in Action 
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Re: range filter?

2015-08-25 Thread Ralph Goers

I believe two threshold filters inside a composite filter should should work 
provided you have the onMatch and onMismatch set appropriately.

Ralph


> On Aug 25, 2015, at 12:36 PM, Nicholas Duane  wrote:
> 
> I'm looking for a range filter in log4j2.  I see there is on in log4net and 
> it appears there was one written by someone for log4j 1.  Just wondering if 
> there is something 'out of the box' in log4j2 that will accomplish the same?  
> I was wondering whether this could be accomplished with the CompositeFilter 
> with two ThresholdFilter?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

RE: range filter?

Re: range filter?

Re: range filter?

30 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information