You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@logging.apache.org by mi...@apache.org on 2016/05/06 14:43:34 UTC
[24/50] logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-1297 removed paragraph on
logging library comparison: will be moved to performance page
LOG4J2-1297 removed paragraph on logging library comparison: will be moved to performance page
Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/repo
Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/commit/286290c4
Tree: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/tree/286290c4
Diff: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/diff/286290c4
Branch: refs/heads/LOG4J-1181
Commit: 286290c4a516f2d4287ac3a4173fd4f8999ae92b
Parents: 59443e1
Author: rpopma <rp...@apache.org>
Authored: Wed May 4 02:24:39 2016 +0900
Committer: rpopma <rp...@apache.org>
Committed: Wed May 4 02:24:39 2016 +0900
----------------------------------------------------------------------
src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml | 9 +--------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/logging-log4j2/blob/286290c4/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
----------------------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml b/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
index b879720..e552f15 100644
--- a/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
+++ b/src/site/xdoc/manual/garbagefree.xml
@@ -456,14 +456,7 @@ public void garbageFree() {
<p>Throughput is roughly similar for garbage-free and classic logging.
In our measurements, Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode had the highest throughput in single-threaded scenarios. In multi-threaded
scenarios, Log4j 2.6 "classic" had the highest throughput, with Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode and Log4j 2.5
- not far behind. Our test results suggest that the throughput of the other logging frameworks we tested
- will rapidly decline in multi-threaded applications.</p>
- <p>The graph below compares Log4j 2.6 in garbage-free mode to Log4j 2.6 "classic" mode (which allocates
- temporary objects for every logging call), Log4j 2.5, Log4j 1.2.17, Logback 1.1.7 and
- Java util logging (JUL) on Oracle Java 1.8.0_45. All Log4j 2.x results use the RandomAccessFile appender.
- Log4j 1.2.17, Logback and JUL use their respective File appenders. ImmediateFlush was set to <tt>false</tt> for all
- loggers that support this. The JUL results are for the <tt>XMLFormatter</tt> (which in our measurements was
- about twice as fast as the <tt>SimpleFormatter</tt>).</p>
+ not far behind.</p>
<p>The synchronous logging throughput results below are obtained with the
<a href="http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/">JMH</a> Java benchmark harness.
See the <tt>org.apache.logging.log4j.perf.jmh.FileAppenderBenchmark</tt> source code in the log4j-perf module.</p>