A little late to the email party but...
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[ X ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
And SOLR-560 looks good too.
- will
: In an effort to put this thread to rest with some sense of closure, perhaps we
yeah, right ... like that will ever happen :)
: [XX ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
: [ ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
-Hoss
: Yes, but why ship any libraries w/ Solr then? We should write HTTPClient for
: ourselves, as well as all the other dependencies. Class loader hell is at the
: very heart of Java and is just something we all deal with unless we go to OSGi
: (I'm told, anyway, but I don't know enough about it) or
that easier third party logging abstractin is a feature, but i
disagree, and am willing to ignore that issue, but i mention it for
completeness since I (and Erik) have brought it up before)
-Hoss
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p17068918.html
: Actually, Solr depends on Lucene :-)
Okay ... I must admit ... this is funnier then Ryan's i prefer kittens
comment.
yes, i suppose we have a core dependency on Lucene which could in theory
result in an incompatibility. That ship has sailed.
: SLF4J doesn't have a LogMessage to propagate
On May 3, 2008, at 4:22 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
If a large subset of the community is in favor of moving away from
JUL
towards some alternative (and I'm not sure that's true),
Perhaps we should take a poll on solr-user? On the dev list, I
there are a few strong opinions, but I
FYI: I'm going to commit a minor list taboo and comment in a thread I'm
not caught up on -- I wrote this on the plane based on some thoughts I had
last night and this morning, and even though i don't have time to catch up
with this thread, I wanted to put this information out there since i
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[ X ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
If a large subset of the community is in favor of moving away from JUL
towards some alternative (and I'm not sure that's true),
Perhaps we should take a poll on solr-user? On the dev list, I there
are a few strong opinions, but I suspect most people don't really care
(as long as it
Yes, but why ship any libraries w/ Solr then? We should write
HTTPClient for ourselves, as well as all the other dependencies. Class
loader hell is at the very heart of Java and is just something we all
deal with unless we go to OSGi (I'm told, anyway, but I don't know
enough about it) or
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[X] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
In an effort to put this thread to rest with some sense of closure,
perhaps we could take a poll of our options:
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[ ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
I think the arguments for each option are:
JUL:
+ it is standard and *should* work everywhere
On May 2, 2008, at 1:14 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
[ x ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
It won't be the end of it, though, as you have pointed out, the issue
comes up every few weeks/months...
On 2-May-08, at 10:14 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[ ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
[ X ] Abstain
I am not at all part of the java-enterprise-y world, and though as an
outsider it strikes me as odd that that logging implementation in the
language's
On 2-May-08, at 11:50 AM, Mike Klaas wrote:
On 2-May-08, at 10:14 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[ ] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
[ X ] Abstain
I am not at all part of the java-enterprise-y world, and though as
an outsider it strikes me as odd
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[X] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p17027714.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
[ ] Keep solr logging as is. (JUL)
[X] Convert solr logging to SLF4J
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p17028119.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
implementation is still up
to the end user running Solr in their servlet container.
-Hoss
--
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p17028232.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
It's not just a question of API compatibility, it's a question of *class*
compatibility (ie: byte code)
Even if the public APIs are consistent, it's very easy to get into
classloader hell when a webapp has one version of a class loaded (even
if it's a private class) while the servlet
proxy (look at the
code).
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p16986393.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: JULI can be configured per-webapp also by adding a logging.properties to the
: classpath (add it to WEB-INF/classes). So you can configure Handlers
: JULI is a Tomcat thing
:
(http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-6.0-doc/api/org/apache/juli/package-summary.html
: ), right? In other words, it
.
Respectfully,
David Smiley
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p16972876.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
JULI can be configured per-webapp also by adding a
logging.properties to the
classpath (add it to WEB-INF/classes). So you can configure Handlers
(FileHandler/ConsoleHandler including filenames) and Formatter per-
webapp.
However
On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: I know logging is sometimes a religious debate, but would others
consider a
: patch that switched Solr to use log4j? Or, commons-logging? I
just don't
: think JUL is up to snuff when it comes to logging. It's a PITA to
configure,
:
. Infact, this discussion prompted me
to
think about why Tomcat is not using commons-logging if it is such a great
thing.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p16894713.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
to another logging API
(slf4j rather than commons if we go that way).
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-tp16836646p16847799.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Thomas, I don't understand why you say that JDK Logging is only on JVM
level. You can have as many different log files as you have Solr instances.
All you need to do it to put a logging properties inside Solr's
web-inf/classes. For example:
# Global Default logging behavior
handlers=
: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:48 AM
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Solr Logging
Anyone have good tips on working w/ java.util.logging (JUL)? For one,
the configuration seems to be per JVM, which isn't all that useful in
a webapp environment.
http://www.crazysquirrel.com/computing/java
28 matches
Mail list logo
