Re[2]: configuration additivity and sparse logger trees

[Christian Hufgard <ch...@gmx.de>]

Hi,

I do not think of it as a bug. It is thought as a feature, that
log4j-appenders are given to all child-appenders. But I was also
looking for a way to disable this feature per default with a single
line...

Greets,

Christian

J> Thanks for your thoughts...  the problem is that I don't want to have to add
J> loggers for each place where I want to turn additivity off.  Whether I create
J> loggers by changing the level or adding a null appender doesn't matter-- I
J> still have to set additional config params for a logger just to have the
J> additivity flag processed.

J> I would argue that this is incorrect behavior and might be a bug.  Anyone else
J> agree?

J> Would this question be better addressed to the developer's list?

J> Thanks.


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Adrian Janssen [mailto:a.janssen@videonetworks.com] 
>> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 4:21 AM
>> To: 'Log4J Users List'
>> Subject: RE: configuration additivity and sparse logger trees
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Jason,
>> 
>> This is not a solution or explanation, but perhaps you can craft a
>> work-around from the following:
>> 
>> I also set the 'additivity' flag to false on a logger that is never
>> explicitly instantiated, however in my case there is an 
>> appender attached to
>> the logger, and this seems to work. Perhaps you can change your
>> configuration approach slightly and choose to set 
>> 'additivity' flag to false
>> on loggers one level lower in the hierarchy where you are specifying
>> appenders.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Adrian
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jason [mailto:logtastic-mail@jcg3.org]
>> Sent: 19 January 2004 04:55
>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org
>> Subject: configuration additivity and sparse logger trees
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Log4j users--
>> 
>> I noticed something odd when I started configuring and 
>> testing log4j and
>> thought I would run it across this mailing list to see what 
>> the response
>> is...
>> 
>> I chose to use log4j because of it's fine-grained logging 
>> control and the
>> ability to turn logging on/off for various categories.  I 
>> tried using the
>> following configuration for my application:
>> 
>>     log4j.logger.ACCESS=ERROR, CONSOLE
>>     log4j.additivity.ACCESS.MyFunction=false
>>     log4j.logger.ACCESS.MyFunction.SubFunction1=INFO, LOGFILE1
>>     log4j.logger.ACCESS.MyFunction.SubFunction2=DEBUG, LOGFILE2
>> 
>> 
>> This does not behave as I would expect it to, all the SubFunction1 and
>> SubFunction2 calls are still going to the CONSOLE in addition 
>> to their log
>> files.
>> 
>> After a little digging through the source code, I realized 
>> that there is no
>> logger created for "ACCESS.MyFunction", so the additivity 
>> property set above
>> never gets used.  I can resolve this by putting in an 
>> additional config
>> line:
>> 
>>     log4j.logger.ACCESS.MyFunction=OFF
>> 
>> Although this is a somewhat reasonable workaround, it is not 
>> ideal (I plan
>> on
>> having _many hundred_ levels where I would have to add these config
>> directives) .  I have to wonder if the code is functioning as 
>> designed or if
>> this is an oversight?  There is no comment on this in the online
>> documentation, and the original configuration should logically work.
>> 
>> 
>> Let me know what your thoughts are.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>> 



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


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