RE: approach for defining loggers

I will certainly look them over again. Thanks,Nick Original message From: Ralph Goers Date: 09/07/2015 9:39 PM (GMT-07:00) To: Log4J Users List Subject: Re: approach for defining loggers I still don’t understand why

Re: approach for defining loggers

I still don’t understand why you don’t want to use Markers. They were designed exactly for the use case you are describing. You might set retention policies for debug vs info, error and fatal, but a BUSINESS marker could cross-cut them all. That is exactly why it is NOT a level. IOW, it

Re: approach for defining loggers

Don't forget that loggers can be controlled by their hierarchical names: com.example = DEBUG, usually sets all levels below it to DEBUG, like com.example.feature1.sub1, com.example.feature1.sub2, com.example.feature2, and so on. Gary On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Nicholas Duane

RE: approach for defining loggers

Yeah, I'm aware of that feature in log4j/log4net. Very nice one by the way. One of the big pluses in my mind. Makes it very easy to control a while slew of loggers based on name. Though in our case we probably won't know many, if any, of the logger names. We basically want to direct all