You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4j-dev@logging.apache.org by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org> on 2006/07/01 05:50:49 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to trunk
On Jun 30, 2006, at 4:10 PM, Elias Ross wrote:
>
> This thread is to discuss adding a "concurrent" library to the Log4j
> "trunk".
>
> I wrote this library primarily to avoid deadlock situations as
> explained
> in bug 24159. In addition to avoiding deadlock situations, I believe
> the bug 33855 explains the reason for wanting to provide a
> "concurrent"
> appender package, in addition to the existing logging appenders.
>
> An adequate analogy might be having java.util.Hashtable and
> java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap in the same library.
>
> Now, in addition to simply merging the code over, I have also some
> patches against the main Log4j that I recommend applying as well.
>
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17613 (start from
> the bottom)
Quite a few of the changes in that attachment or alternative takes on
the same issues have already been applied to trunk. I've review the
changes to the layout classes and have committed changes (rev 418432)
that I believe addressed your concerns with the Layout classes. If I
missed something let me know and attach issue specific patches.
>
> The main "fix" is to make the various Layout classes thread-safe.
> Now,
> I can actually adapt my code to assume non-thread-safety, but it seems
> reasonable to require that all layouts used with the concurrent
> appenders be thread safe and that all Log4J supplied layouts should be
> thread-safe.
>
> Additionally you'll see in the, I did notice that buffered I/O by
> default does help performance quite a bit, and even combined with
> flushing per message helps out. I do suggest changing the default
> to be
> the faster configuration.
>
I'd be very reluctant to change the default value of a significant
configuration parameter. However, if we were to consider it, I'd
suggest filing a distinct bug and calling for a separate vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] was Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to trunk
Posted by Paul Smith <ps...@aconex.com>.
+1 (have actually suffered deadlock problems with log4j in production)
On 22/07/2006, at 7:31 AM, Elias Ross wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 14:09 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
>
>> This should get you the source.
>>
>> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/log4j/
>> concurrent log4j-concurrent
>>
>> I'd like to put out a vote in the next week. I would appreciate your
>> help.
>
> Okay, now that it's "next week" I'm calling for a vote for the
> migration
> of the concurrent library to trunk. :-)
>
> Please answer with 1 or 0 and your choice of + and - symbols.
>
> [Why? 1. Provides deadlock-free appenders. 2. Provides a base for
> appenders that could benefit from concurrency, e.g. those that do I/O.
> 3. Could serve as a basis for the Log4j 2.0 redesign. 4. Does not
> impact the Log4j 1.3 release or compatibility and is very small. ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] was Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to trunk
Posted by Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>.
+1.
Yoav
On 7/21/06, Elias Ross <er...@m-qube.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 14:09 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
>
> > This should get you the source.
> >
> > svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/log4j/concurrent log4j-concurrent
> >
> > I'd like to put out a vote in the next week. I would appreciate your
> > help.
>
> Okay, now that it's "next week" I'm calling for a vote for the migration
> of the concurrent library to trunk. :-)
>
> Please answer with 1 or 0 and your choice of + and - symbols.
>
> [Why? 1. Provides deadlock-free appenders. 2. Provides a base for
> appenders that could benefit from concurrency, e.g. those that do I/O.
> 3. Could serve as a basis for the Log4j 2.0 redesign. 4. Does not
> impact the Log4j 1.3 release or compatibility and is very small. ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] was Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from
sandbox to trunk
Posted by Jacob Kjome <ho...@visi.com>.
+1
Jake
At 04:31 PM 7/21/2006, you wrote:
>On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 14:09 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
>
>> This should get you the source.
>>
>> svn co
>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/log4j/concurrent
>log4j-concurrent
>>
>> I'd like to put out a vote in the next week. I would appreciate your
>> help.
>
>Okay, now that it's "next week" I'm calling for a vote for the migration
>of the concurrent library to trunk. :-)
>
>Please answer with 1 or 0 and your choice of + and - symbols.
>
>[Why? 1. Provides deadlock-free appenders. 2. Provides a base for
>appenders that could benefit from concurrency, e.g. those that do I/O.
>3. Could serve as a basis for the Log4j 2.0 redesign. 4. Does not
>impact the Log4j 1.3 release or compatibility and is very small. ]
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
[VOTE] was Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to
trunk
Posted by Elias Ross <er...@m-qube.com>.
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 14:09 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
> This should get you the source.
>
> svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/log4j/concurrent log4j-concurrent
>
> I'd like to put out a vote in the next week. I would appreciate your
> help.
Okay, now that it's "next week" I'm calling for a vote for the migration
of the concurrent library to trunk. :-)
Please answer with 1 or 0 and your choice of + and - symbols.
[Why? 1. Provides deadlock-free appenders. 2. Provides a base for
appenders that could benefit from concurrency, e.g. those that do I/O.
3. Could serve as a basis for the Log4j 2.0 redesign. 4. Does not
impact the Log4j 1.3 release or compatibility and is very small. ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to trunk
Posted by Elias Ross <er...@m-qube.com>.
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 14:05 -0700, Elias Ross wrote:
> Does anybody have comments pertaining to the migration itself?
Are there any comments about the migration? Any comments about the
source.
This should get you the source.
svn co http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/sandbox/log4j/concurrent log4j-concurrent
I'd like to put out a vote in the next week. I would appreciate your
help.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Migrate log4j-concurrent from sandbox to trunk
Posted by Elias Ross <er...@m-qube.com>.
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 22:50 -0500, Curt Arnold wrote:
>
> I'd be very reluctant to change the default value of a significant
> configuration parameter. However, if we were to consider it, I'd
> suggest filing a distinct bug and calling for a separate vote.
>
I will file a separate bug for this task.
Does anybody have comments pertaining to the migration itself?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org