Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-08-10 Thread Asma Jabir
Hi Proceeding with the aforementioned, we replaced carbon-logging with pax-logging. Now it is essential to start logging bundles before other bundles and according to the current architecture the bundles are loaded as per the bundles.info file which are listed in alphabetical order. Hence pax logg

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-08-02 Thread Asma Jabir
[Updating architecture due to held mails in the thread - Apologies for the duplication] Hi Ruwan, As per the Log4J 2 documentation, CloseableThreadContext has to be used in order to support this. This has to be inserted into the pipeline (before reaching the kernel) similar to how the CarbonCont

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-07-31 Thread Ruwan Abeykoon
Hi All, Can we consider introducing "Diagnostic Context" (e.g. [1] )while on this effort ? which will improve our logging information considerably. [1] https://www.javacodegeeks.com/2013/01/effective-logging-in-javajee-mapped-diagnostic-context.html Cheers, Ruwan On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 4:40 PM,

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-07-31 Thread KasunG Gajasinghe
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:50 PM, KasunG Gajasinghe wrote: > Hi Asma, > > Can you explain why we need to do this from a user perspective? What are > the advantages/disavantages? > > Log4j does not support the Log4j properties file format. So, this change > is not backward-compatible. > > On Mon,

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-07-16 Thread Asma Jabir
Hi We already have a central logging module in the kernel which is org.wso2.carbon.logging [1] and that acts similar to the a Logging API. So we can can continue to use it and all the logging specific dependencies and imports will be residing here. But the custom appenders are located in org.wso2.

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-07-15 Thread Ruwan Abeykoon
Hi Irunika, In C4, applications use commons logging. We never wanted to use Log4J directly. Hence the architecture you proposed is already there in C4. In C5 we use slf4j, in place of commons logging, which architecturally the same. Hence I do not see any value in introducing another WSO2 specific

Re: [Architecture] [CARBON] C4 Migration from Log4J 1.x to Log4J 2.x

2017-07-14 Thread Irunika Weeraratne
Hi Asma, > > The following approaches were found and evaluated to identify the most > suitable one. > >1. Using pax-logging >- The pax-logging api and the pax-logging-log4j bridge will have to be > used. > - Supposedly, pax-logging will feed the front-end logging into its >