You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com> on 2008/05/06 16:40:52 UTC
[poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Hello-
There has been a long running thread on solr-dev proposing switching
the logging system to use something other then JDK logging.
http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-td16836646.html
http://www.nabble.com/logging-through-log4j-td13747253.html
We are considering using http://www.slf4j.org/. Check:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-560
The "pro" argument is that:
* SLFJ allows more flexibility for people using solr outside the
canned .war to configure logging without touching JDK logging.
The "con" argument goes something like:
* JDK logging is already is the standard logging framework.
* JDK logging is already in in use.
* SLF4J adds another dependency (for something that already works)
On the dev lists there are a strong opinions on either side, but we
would like to get a larger sampling of option and validation before
making this change.
[ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
[ ] Use SLF4J.
As an bonus question (this time fill in the blank):
I have tried SOLR-560 with my logging system and ___________________________.
thanks
ryan
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Henrib <hb...@gmail.com>.
Ryan McKinley wrote:
>
>> [ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
>> [X ] Use SLF4J.
>
Can't "keep as is" since this strictly precludes configuring logging in a
container agnostic way.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-poll--Change-logging-to-SLF4J--tp17084684p17405410.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
: So I'm not sure where that leaves us. Unless Grant feels strongly, I think we
: should drop it till after 1.3 release.
+1
I think that would be wise even if there were more votes. I'd like to see
SLF4J in JUL mode sitting on the trunk with people using the nightlies not
noticing anything strange before we put a lot of faith in releasing with
it.
-Hoss
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Hymm, I guess folks aren't coming out of the woodwork to vote for this
one.
Wicket recently had a poll with ~100 votes cast:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--vote--Release-1.4-with-only-generics-and-stop-support-for-1.3-p16220947.html
So I'm not sure where that leaves us. Unless Grant feels strongly, I
think we should drop it till after 1.3 release.
ryan
On May 16, 2008, at 5:49 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> (note: list change to solr-dev)
>
> Giving the underwhelming response to this poll, it seems pretty
> clear to
> me that the number of people who care one way or another about how
> Solr
> does logging can probably be counted on one hand ... ok, maybe two
> hands.
>
>
>
> -Hoss
>
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Chris Hostetter <ho...@fucit.org>.
(note: list change to solr-dev)
Giving the underwhelming response to this poll, it seems pretty clear to
me that the number of people who care one way or another about how Solr
does logging can probably be counted on one hand ... ok, maybe two hands.
-Hoss
Re: [SPAM] [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by jm <jm...@gmail.com>.
me too...
[ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
[X] Use SLF4J.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Matthew Runo <mr...@zappos.com> wrote:
> I just read through the dev list's thread.. and I'm voting for SLF4J as
> well.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matthew Runo
> Software Developer
> Zappos.com
> 702.943.7833
>
> On May 6, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
>>
>> Hello-
>>
>> There has been a long running thread on solr-dev proposing switching
>> the logging system to use something other then JDK logging.
>> http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-td16836646.html
>> http://www.nabble.com/logging-through-log4j-td13747253.html
>>
>> We are considering using http://www.slf4j.org/. Check:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-560
>>
>> The "pro" argument is that:
>> * SLFJ allows more flexibility for people using solr outside the
>> canned .war to configure logging without touching JDK logging.
>>
>> The "con" argument goes something like:
>> * JDK logging is already is the standard logging framework.
>> * JDK logging is already in in use.
>> * SLF4J adds another dependency (for something that already works)
>>
>> On the dev lists there are a strong opinions on either side, but we
>> would like to get a larger sampling of option and validation before
>> making this change.
>>
>> [ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
>> [ ] Use SLF4J.
>>
>> As an bonus question (this time fill in the blank):
>> I have tried SOLR-560 with my logging system and
>> ___________________________.
>>
>> thanks
>> ryan
>>
>
>
Re: [SPAM] [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Matthew Runo <mr...@zappos.com>.
I just read through the dev list's thread.. and I'm voting for SLF4J
as well.
Thanks!
Matthew Runo
Software Developer
Zappos.com
702.943.7833
On May 6, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
> Hello-
>
> There has been a long running thread on solr-dev proposing switching
> the logging system to use something other then JDK logging.
> http://www.nabble.com/Solr-Logging-td16836646.html
> http://www.nabble.com/logging-through-log4j-td13747253.html
>
> We are considering using http://www.slf4j.org/. Check:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-560
>
> The "pro" argument is that:
> * SLFJ allows more flexibility for people using solr outside the
> canned .war to configure logging without touching JDK logging.
>
> The "con" argument goes something like:
> * JDK logging is already is the standard logging framework.
> * JDK logging is already in in use.
> * SLF4J adds another dependency (for something that already works)
>
> On the dev lists there are a strong opinions on either side, but we
> would like to get a larger sampling of option and validation before
> making this change.
>
> [ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
> [ ] Use SLF4J.
>
> As an bonus question (this time fill in the blank):
> I have tried SOLR-560 with my logging system and
> ___________________________.
>
> thanks
> ryan
>
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On May 6, 2008, at 10:40 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
>
> [ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
> [X ] Use SLF4J.
But you already knew that...
Re: [poll] Change logging to SLF4J?
Posted by Ken Krugler <kk...@transpac.com>.
Hoss has shamed me into taking a position on this.
I didn't vote earlier, because I have no real experience with SLF4J,
other than indirectly via our use of Jetty.
But I do know that we'd have to do _something_ for logging when we
switch to embedded Solr.
Under the hood we now use Log4J everywhere, so finishing up my
earlier work on creating a JUL logger that bridged to Log4J was
another option, but one I'd rather avoid.
So...
>[ ] Keep solr logging as it is. (JDK Logging)
>[X] Use SLF4J.
-- Ken
--
Ken Krugler
Krugle, Inc.
+1 530-210-6378
"If you can't find it, you can't fix it"