[Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Simon Kitching
Hi, I was recently informed of this thread about memory leaks occurring on undeploy with hibernate and saw a fair bit of criticism on commons-logging. I have written a counter-argument which is available here: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/Logging/UndeployMemoryLeak I hope you find t

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Christian Bauer
I was recently informed of this thread about memory leaks occurring on undeploy with hibernate and saw a fair bit of criticism on commons-logging. Btw, it would be great if someone could look into replacing commons logging with Log4j and providing a JDK 1.4 appender for Log4j. ---

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Simon Kitching
Hi Christian, On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 13:56 +0200, Christian Bauer wrote: > > I was recently informed of this thread about memory leaks occurring on > > undeploy with hibernate and saw a fair bit of criticism on > > commons-logging. > > > > Btw, it would be great if someone could look into replacin

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Christian Bauer
On Jul 27, 2005, at 2:11 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: Did you read the page I wrote? It's saying that provided that hibernate and/or the container (eg jboss) uses commons-logging correctly there's no need to move away from it. [1] I personally don't care about what you wrote... sorry. We are a

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Christian Bauer
It's just that nobody had time to look into it. And it might well turn out that the effort of removing the dependency on commons logging is too much for the benefit we'd get. So far I had the impression that nobody wants to bother with logging discussions and I really share that view, so

RE: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Steve Ebersole
Here is the trivial converter :) public class JDK14LoggingAdapter extends org.apache.log4j.AppenderSkeleton { protected void append(org.apache.log4j.spi.LoggingEvent event) { // super has already validated we are not closed and any // thresholds have been

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Barry Hawkins
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christian Bauer wrote: [...] > I don't see any integration problems without commons logging as > virtually everybody is using Log4j. Another solution would be a simple > Delegate (implemented dynamically typed) in Hibernate and a > configuration opt

RE: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Steve Ebersole
We are talking about moving to log4j... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry Hawkins Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 8:49 AM To: Christian Bauer Cc: Hibernate devel Subject: Re: [Hibernate] commons logging -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE---

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Barry Hawkins
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Ebersole wrote: > We are talking about moving to log4j... > [...] Sorry, misread Christian's original reference to a 1.4 JDK appender. - -- Barry Hawkins All Things Computed site: www.alltc.com weblog: www.yepthatsme.com Registered Linux User

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Simon Kitching
Hi Adrian, Thanks very much for your response. On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 11:46 -0400, Adrian Brock wrote: > Static collections are the root of all memory leak brain deaths. Agreed. And if java provided the ability to attach arbitrary data to a classloader then LogFactory would use this instead of

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Simon Kitching
Hi Adrian, Sorry I should have read the jboss logging page through to the end before posting :-(. On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 11:43 +1200, Simon Kitching wrote: > > > > JBoss also has its own trivial logging abstraction (factory + wrapper) > > that does not have these problems and allows other logging

Re: [Hibernate] commons logging

2005-07-27 Thread Simon Kitching
Hi Adrian, On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 20:15 -0400, Adrian Brock wrote: > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 19:43, Simon Kitching wrote: > > I feel that it is simply unacceptable to drop thirdparty libraries that > > have never expected to be "container extensions" into the container's > > classpath? > > So aren'