FAQ source code comment wrong/dynamic routing lookup broken?

[Joachim Kanbach <jo...@gmx.de>]

Hi all,

I have a question regarding the Routing appender. I was reading the FAQ at http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/faq.html#separate_log_files and got confused by the two source code comments:

"<!-- This route is chosen if ThreadContext has no value for key ROUTINGKEY. -->"

and

"<!-- This route is chosen if ThreadContext has a value for ROUTINGKEY (other than the value 'special' which had its own route above). The value dynamically determines the name of the log file. -->".

As it appears to me, these two comments should be swapped to match the code that follows them?

I also tried to use the described dynamic naming of the log file by defining a route with a lookup key like this:

<Route key="$${ctx:applicationName}">

But unfortunately, this doesn't work for me using Log4j2 2.5. When I do have a value assigned to that key in the Thread Context, that route is never matched. When there's no value, the route seems to get matched, but instead the filename lookup (obviously) fails, i.e. I get a file like "${ctx:applicationName}.log".

If I use a fixed key (<Route key="SomeAppName">), everything works fine, even the filename lookup correctly resolves ${ctx:applicationName} too.

I searched the changelog but couldn't find anything about it. Did someone else encounter this bug?


Best regards,
Joachim Kanbach

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org