My log4j.properties file is pasted below. My understanding is that we need
to add Appenders to the *root *logger for the appender to work. As you can
see in the below properties file, only appender A is attached to the root
logger (log4j.rootLogger=info, A). However, what I see is that the logging
Very clever! I'd love to see the whole implementation and reports you are
describing.
Gary
div Original message /divdivFrom: Scott Harrington
scott...@sns-usa.com /divdivDate:07/11/2014 00:23 (GMT-05:00)
/divdivTo: Log4J Users List log4j-user@logging.apache.org
I understand Ralph ' s concern but now is the time for this kind of change.
Otherwise we will need even more clever solutions to get this kind of size
improvement. I'd love to see some performance numbers. The size improvement is
not negligible, which is great!
Gary
div Original
I would second the ExternalizedLayout. Layouts are the way to go for
compatibility and are simpler. Particularly useful for alternative
serialization protocols, too.
On 11 July 2014 06:41, Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand Ralph ' s concern but now is the time for this
Check out the additivity setting. Plus, check out Log4j 2.0 as that's what
we're all focused on right now!
On 11 July 2014 01:01, Vishal Pore pore.vis...@gmail.com wrote:
My log4j.properties file is pasted below. My understanding is that we need
to add Appenders to the *root *logger for the
That is a nice reduction in size!
I also think the ExternalizedLayout idea is a very attractive option. That
way there is no pressure to include this in any particular release, we can
release it when we are confident that is ready. I also like the fact that
it does not replace the current
Why don't you place your webapp's log4j.properties file in WEB-INF/classes
instead of WEB-INF/classes/properties? That way, the webapp classloader won't
ever see the tomcat log4j.properties, thus no rolling file appender conflicts.
Jake
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:16:41 +0800
guowei
First, your understanding is incorrect. You can attach appenders to any
logger, not just the root. Second, there must be some other stray log4j
config file being loaded, instead of this one, that logs to a file appender
pointing at the same file as the one in this log4j.properties.
I
What prevents you from writing a more compact representation of the
LogEvent (including all other LogEvent fields) to the byte array in the
{{toByteArray(LogEvent)}} method of an ExternalizableLayout?
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com
wrote:
I looked at
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:52 AM, Remko Popma remko.po...@gmail.com wrote:
What prevents you from writing a more compact representation of the
LogEvent (including all other LogEvent fields) to the byte array in the
{{toByteArray(LogEvent)}} method of an ExternalizableLayout?
(Just to clarify,
Yes it did appear toByteArray would do the job on the /sending/ side but
what about the /receiving/ side? We've got to put some bytes on the wire
that will come out as a LogEvent from the readObject() call in
ObjectInputStreamLogEventBridge. You can't have the sender be
Externalizable and the
Yes that is what I had in mind.
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com
wrote:
Yes it did appear toByteArray would do the job on the /sending/ side but
what about the /receiving/ side? We've got to put some bytes on the wire
that will come out as a LogEvent
OK! Agree. So the 2.1 enhancement request will be for a
CompactBinaryLayout on the sending side and corresponding LogEventBridge
on the receiving side. I'll open it in JIRA when I get back from vacation
and have a chance to work through an initial implementation, unless
someone else beats me
It sounds good to go with an initial Serializable format that is easy to
maintain and provide an additional format later that is optimized.
Gary
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com
wrote:
OK! Agree. So the 2.1 enhancement request will be for a
Sounds good.
This approach allows for many different serialization formats. It might be
nice to have the CompactBinaryLayout even be “pluggable” to support things like
Hessian, Protobuf, Thrift, etc. Of course, that would also require the
LogEventBridge to have support as well.
Ralph
On
15 matches
Mail list logo
