You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ignite.apache.org by Konstantin Orlov <ko...@gridgain.com> on 2023/06/08 14:45:41 UTC

[DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Hi,

Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3


-- 
Regards,
Konstantin Orlov






Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Posted by Ilya Korol <ll...@gmail.com>.
Hi Konstantin,

Btw, Ignite 2 has also public methods that accepts a Marker.

     public void info(String marker, String msg);

Was this part of previous Implementation considered as redundant?

I'm concerned because, despite it might not be needed for Ignite 3 
itself, IgniteLogger is also a component that can be used by end-users 
directly in implementations if Ignite services, Compute tasks/jobs, 
Event Listeners, Filters etc...

     public class FooTask extends ComputeTaskAdapter<FooParams, Void> {

         @LoggerResource
         protected IgniteLogger log;

     }

So it might be valuable for end-user if IgniteLogger would have similar 
features as any common Logger.


On 08.06.2023 17:45, Konstantin Orlov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal
>
> IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3 - Apache Ignite - Apache Software 
> Foundation 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
> cwiki.apache.org 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
> 	favicon.ico 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3> 
>
>
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Konstantin Orlov
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Posted by Konstantin Orlov <ko...@gridgain.com>.
Hi, Ilya

The presence of thick clients in Ignite 2 slipped my mind, so I was trying to justify running two data nodes in the same JVM.

Agree, this definitely makes sense for Ignite 2. Thanks for clarification!

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin Orlov




> On 13 Jun 2023, at 18:06, Ilya Kasnacheev <il...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello!
> 
> Even apart from testing, it is not uncommon to have JVM connect two
> different Ignite clusters (two heterogenous ones or one main cluster and
> the second "management" small cluster, for example)
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Ilya Kasnacheev
> 
> 
> вт, 13 июн. 2023 г. в 12:46, Konstantin Orlov <korlov@gridgain.com <ma...@gridgain.com>>:
> 
>> Hi Ilya,
>> 
>> I wonder why do you try to run several Ignite instances in the same JVM in
>> the first place? Is there any value to do so, apart for testing?
>> 
>> Anyway, with current proposal you could try to configure message routing
>> based on a thread name: every thread in Ignite 3 should have name which
>> starts with "%<nodeName>%” prefix.
>> 
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Konstantin Orlov
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 8 Jun 2023, at 18:14, Ilya Korol <ll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Konstantin. Thanks for you work.
>>> 
>>> Despite you proposal is more about public API of logging Ignite
>> facility, I believe that this thread is the best place to highlight some
>> topic about internal details of IgniteLogger based on my experience with
>> Ignite 2
>>> 
>>> I already tried to initiate a discussion at the end of previous year,
>> unfortunately there were not so many community members eager to discuss it.
>>> 
>>> Here is the link
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/xcllwbz12cpb5437hrt5n1xfdfp0wqct
>>> 
>>> The feature, that from my perspective, is missing in current
>> implementation (AI2) and that should be kept in mind when it comes to
>> implement logging IEP,
>>> is ability to separate messages produced by different Ignite instances
>> running in same JVM,
>>> so at appenders level (no matter of the actual logging implementation)
>> there is no way to properly route log messages to separate locations based
>> on the message source node.
>>> 
>>> Maybe community will find this feature useful.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 08.06.2023 17:45, Konstantin Orlov wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Konstantin Orlov


Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Posted by Ilya Kasnacheev <il...@gmail.com>.
Hello!

Even apart from testing, it is not uncommon to have JVM connect two
different Ignite clusters (two heterogenous ones or one main cluster and
the second "management" small cluster, for example)

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


вт, 13 июн. 2023 г. в 12:46, Konstantin Orlov <ko...@gridgain.com>:

> Hi Ilya,
>
> I wonder why do you try to run several Ignite instances in the same JVM in
> the first place? Is there any value to do so, apart for testing?
>
> Anyway, with current proposal you could try to configure message routing
> based on a thread name: every thread in Ignite 3 should have name which
> starts with "%<nodeName>%” prefix.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Konstantin Orlov
>
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jun 2023, at 18:14, Ilya Korol <ll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Konstantin. Thanks for you work.
> >
> > Despite you proposal is more about public API of logging Ignite
> facility, I believe that this thread is the best place to highlight some
> topic about internal details of IgniteLogger based on my experience with
> Ignite 2
> >
> > I already tried to initiate a discussion at the end of previous year,
> unfortunately there were not so many community members eager to discuss it.
> >
> > Here is the link
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/xcllwbz12cpb5437hrt5n1xfdfp0wqct
> >
> > The feature, that from my perspective, is missing in current
> implementation (AI2) and that should be kept in mind when it comes to
> implement logging IEP,
> > is ability to separate messages produced by different Ignite instances
> running in same JVM,
> > so at appenders level (no matter of the actual logging implementation)
> there is no way to properly route log messages to separate locations based
> on the message source node.
> >
> > Maybe community will find this feature useful.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 08.06.2023 17:45, Konstantin Orlov wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal
> >>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Konstantin Orlov
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Posted by Konstantin Orlov <ko...@gridgain.com>.
Hi Ilya,

I wonder why do you try to run several Ignite instances in the same JVM in the first place? Is there any value to do so, apart for testing? 

Anyway, with current proposal you could try to configure message routing based on a thread name: every thread in Ignite 3 should have name which starts with "%<nodeName>%” prefix.

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin Orlov




> On 8 Jun 2023, at 18:14, Ilya Korol <ll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Konstantin. Thanks for you work.
> 
> Despite you proposal is more about public API of logging Ignite facility, I believe that this thread is the best place to highlight some topic about internal details of IgniteLogger based on my experience with Ignite 2
> 
> I already tried to initiate a discussion at the end of previous year, unfortunately there were not so many community members eager to discuss it.
> 
> Here is the link https://lists.apache.org/thread/xcllwbz12cpb5437hrt5n1xfdfp0wqct
> 
> The feature, that from my perspective, is missing in current implementation (AI2) and that should be kept in mind when it comes to implement logging IEP,
> is ability to separate messages produced by different Ignite instances running in same JVM,
> so at appenders level (no matter of the actual logging implementation) there is no way to properly route log messages to separate locations based on the message source node.
> 
> Maybe community will find this feature useful.
> 
> 
> 
> On 08.06.2023 17:45, Konstantin Orlov wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal
>> 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> Konstantin Orlov
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 


Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3

Posted by Ilya Korol <ll...@gmail.com>.
Hi Konstantin. Thanks for you work.

Despite you proposal is more about public API of logging Ignite 
facility, I believe that this thread is the best place to highlight some 
topic about internal details of IgniteLogger based on my experience with 
Ignite 2

I already tried to initiate a discussion at the end of previous year, 
unfortunately there were not so many community members eager to discuss it.

Here is the link 
https://lists.apache.org/thread/xcllwbz12cpb5437hrt5n1xfdfp0wqct

The feature, that from my perspective, is missing in current 
implementation (AI2) and that should be kept in mind when it comes to 
implement logging IEP,
is ability to *separate messages produced by different Ignite instances 
running in same JVM*,
so at appenders level (no matter of the actual logging implementation) 
there is no way to properly route log messages to separate locations 
based on the message source node.

Maybe community will find this feature useful.


On 08.06.2023 17:45, Konstantin Orlov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please review "IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3” proposal
>
> IEP-107 Logging in Ignite 3 - Apache Ignite - Apache Software 
> Foundation 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
> cwiki.apache.org 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
> 	favicon.ico 
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3> 
>
>
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-107+Logging+in+Ignite+3>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Konstantin Orlov
>
>
>
>
>