You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu> on 2005/07/06 03:36:39 UTC
New Startup Output, Mark 2
Okay, now you have the following options:
java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and official
releases.
Aaron
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:25:08PM -0400, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
>
> - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
> - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
>
> I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
> not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
>
Peachy. Glad people like the -v -vv idea. You might consider -v
being WARN and going down from there. I have no clear preference as
to the flag for it, but it could be nice to basically get no output
but WARN, ERROR, FATAL.
Just throwing the idea out, we already have some great stuff so
doesn't really matter if it goes anywhere.
-David
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Aaron Mulder wrote, On 7/7/2005 4:25 PM:
> Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
>
> - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
> - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
>
> I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
>not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
>
>
Sounds cool.
Regards,
Alan
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by si...@insession.com.
David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote on 09/07/2005 02:20:22 AM:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:07:13AM -0400, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > 10:51:28,745 INFO [Daemon] Server startup completed
> > 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 3s to start org/apache/geronimo/System
> > 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 5s to start org/apache/geronimo/Server
> > 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 2s to start
org/apache/geronimo/Deployer
> > ...
> >
> > Finally, I don't think it's a good idea to add something like
> > this to the progress bar. <[edited]> I'd prefer this kind of thing get
> > added to the "-v" or "-vv" startup options instead.
>
> +1 to that.
Created JIRA issue http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-733 so it
isn't forgotten.
John
>
>
> -David
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:07:13AM -0400, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> 10:51:28,745 INFO [Daemon] Server startup completed
> 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 3s to start org/apache/geronimo/System
> 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 5s to start org/apache/geronimo/Server
> 10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 2s to start org/apache/geronimo/Deployer
> ...
>
> Finally, I don't think it's a good idea to add something like
> this to the progress bar. <[edited]> I'd prefer this kind of thing get
> added to the "-v" or "-vv" startup options instead.
+1 to that.
-David
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > At the risk of showing words in your mouth, are you suggesting it
> > would just be nice to see how long it took to start each component?
>
> Exactly. It would just give people a reference as to what got done at
> each additional delta of the progress bar...
This should be easy for someone to implement. Let me explain:
- The code is in the system module
- The class that starts the server is Daemon.
- Daemon uses a helper class that implements StartupMonitor and calls
the appropriate methods on that as things happen during the startup
sequence. The helper class is responsible for nearly all output from
the startup classes themselves.
- The progress bar is implemented in ProgressBarStartupMonitor
- The non-pb is implemented in SilentStartupMonitor
So, if you want additional output in a non-progress-bar case (such
as with DEBUG or INFO output enabled), you can either add code to
SilentStartupMonitor or add a new implementation of StartupMonitor and
instantiate that instead of SilentStartupMonitor in the "-v" and "-vv"
cases (leaving SilentStartupMonitor for the "-quiet" case).
The startup monitor is called every time a configuration is
loading, loaded, starting, and started. Note there are only a handful of
configurations (5-10, usually), you do not get a call for every GBean
loaded or something like that. Anyway, if you want to know how long it
takes each configuration to be loaded and started, just call
System.currentTimeMillis here and there and keep some statistics.
I would recommend that you save any such output to the end for the
case where DEBUG or INFO output is enabled, since it would otherwise be
lost among all the initial output. But if you save the stats along the
way, the final output could look something like this:
10:51:28,745 INFO [Daemon] Server startup completed
10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 3s to start org/apache/geronimo/System
10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 5s to start org/apache/geronimo/Server
10:51:28,745 INFO [MyMonitor] 2s to start org/apache/geronimo/Deployer
...
Finally, I don't think it's a good idea to add something like this
to the progress bar. The progress bar is very clean by design, and I
don't think more specific statistics would be helpful to the typical user.
The server developers are more likely to be interested in finer-grained
information (and more likely to want more detailed log output as well), so
I'd prefer this kind of thing get added to the "-v" or "-vv" startup
options instead.
Thanks,
Aaron
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 7, 2005, at 8:53 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:53:47PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> You could also print the current progress bar into the log at each
>> update point, so people could put two and two together, so to
>> speak...
>>
>
> I'm kinda scratching my head as to why you would want a progress bar
> in a log file no one sees till everything is done.
>
> At the risk of showing words in your mouth, are you suggesting it
> would just be nice to see how long it took to start each component?
Exactly. It would just give people a reference as to what got done at
each additional delta of the progress bar...
>
> I would +1 that -- though, not if I had to implement it :)
>
> -David
>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:53:47PM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> You could also print the current progress bar into the log at each
> update point, so people could put two and two together, so to
> speak...
I'm kinda scratching my head as to why you would want a progress bar
in a log file no one sees till everything is done.
At the risk of showing words in your mouth, are you suggesting it
would just be nice to see how long it took to start each component?
I would +1 that -- though, not if I had to implement it :)
-David
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by toby cabot <to...@caboteria.org>.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 08:03:52PM -0400, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> You should try it -- it's cool. :)
I did, and it is!
Looks like it supercedes the patch in bug GERONIMO-264 so I think you
can close it.
Thanks,
Toby
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
You should try it -- it's cool. :)
The standard log configuration sends all DEBUG and higher output
to the log file. If you go with "-quiet", no startup parameter, or "-v",
then you're raising the threshold for messages printed to the console, but
you still get everything in the log file. If you go with "-vv" then you
get DEBUG and higher on the console as well as in the log file. You can
still edit the log configuration in geronimo/var/log to override these
defaults, to enable TRACE or just highly customize the output or whatever.
IMHO it would be nice if we could only suppress our own output to
the console, and leave application DEBUG and INFO printing. But the only
way I know of is to raise the threshold for our packages for all appenders
(console and log file) -- I'm not aware of a way to raise the threshold
for console but leave it low for log file for a given package. Does
anyone know how to do that? It may still not solve the progress bar
interruption (if an app prints to the log from a startup servlet or
something), but it would sure be a nice option.
Aaron
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:47 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> How do I get progress bar *and* log level DEBUG?
> >>
> >
> > That doesn't make sense to me -- the DEBUG output would mangle the
> > progress bar by inserting output between every time the progress
> > bar tries
> > to repaint its progress line. Besides resulting in tons of separate
> > progress lines, since the progress bar doesn't emit carriage
> > returns while
> > rendering, I think the first debug message after a repaint is
> > appended to
> > the end of the progress line instead of starting a line of its own.
> > Finally, the status information provided by the progress bar is
> > more or
> > less duplicated by log messages announcing as each component is
> > started.
>
> I see. Ok. I'l admit I hadn't tried it, but was going on what you
> had posted to the list.
>
> I had figured that the debug output was going to a logfile, and the
> progress bar was on the console ('stdout'), so a human could see the
> progress coming up, and still have the full record in the log. You
> could also print the current progress bar into the log at each update
> point, so people could put two and two together, so to speak...
>
> >
> > If we were willing and able to eliminate all DEBUG and INFO output
> > from the server startup sequence, we could keep the progress and
> > still get
> > the DEBUG or INFO messages after startup. However, I think that's
> > unlikely. For example, I got ActiveMQ to agree not to emit a WARN
> > message
> > if the necessary JMS tables are already available at startup, but it
> > didn't sound like they were prepared to forego that message entirely.
> >
>
> Yah - I think we definitely need to have all info available for
> people, but the progress bar idea is cool too...
>
> geir
>
> > Aaron
> >
> >
> >> On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
> >>>
> >>> - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
> >>> - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
> >>>
> >>> I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
> >>> not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Aaron
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> +1 on the format.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this
> >>>> has been posted already.
> >>>>
> >>>> - Matt
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
> >>>> To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Nice! You rock!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level
> >>>>>> WARN
> >>>>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
> >>>>>> etc.
> >>>>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
> >>>>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
> >>>>>> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and
> >>>>>> official
> >>>>>> releases.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Aaron
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> >> geirm@apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:47 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> How do I get progress bar *and* log level DEBUG?
>>
>
> That doesn't make sense to me -- the DEBUG output would mangle the
> progress bar by inserting output between every time the progress
> bar tries
> to repaint its progress line. Besides resulting in tons of separate
> progress lines, since the progress bar doesn't emit carriage
> returns while
> rendering, I think the first debug message after a repaint is
> appended to
> the end of the progress line instead of starting a line of its own.
> Finally, the status information provided by the progress bar is
> more or
> less duplicated by log messages announcing as each component is
> started.
I see. Ok. I'l admit I hadn't tried it, but was going on what you
had posted to the list.
I had figured that the debug output was going to a logfile, and the
progress bar was on the console ('stdout'), so a human could see the
progress coming up, and still have the full record in the log. You
could also print the current progress bar into the log at each update
point, so people could put two and two together, so to speak...
>
> If we were willing and able to eliminate all DEBUG and INFO output
> from the server startup sequence, we could keep the progress and
> still get
> the DEBUG or INFO messages after startup. However, I think that's
> unlikely. For example, I got ActiveMQ to agree not to emit a WARN
> message
> if the necessary JMS tables are already available at startup, but it
> didn't sound like they were prepared to forego that message entirely.
>
Yah - I think we definitely need to have all info available for
people, but the progress bar idea is cool too...
geir
> Aaron
>
>
>> On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
>>>
>>> - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
>>> - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
>>>
>>> I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
>>> not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> +1 on the format.
>>>>
>>>> I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this
>>>> has been posted already.
>>>>
>>>> - Matt
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
>>>> To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Nice! You rock!
>>>>>
>>>>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level
>>>>>> WARN
>>>>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>>>>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
>>>>>> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and
>>>>>> official
>>>>>> releases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aaron
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
>> geirm@apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> How do I get progress bar *and* log level DEBUG?
That doesn't make sense to me -- the DEBUG output would mangle the
progress bar by inserting output between every time the progress bar tries
to repaint its progress line. Besides resulting in tons of separate
progress lines, since the progress bar doesn't emit carriage returns while
rendering, I think the first debug message after a repaint is appended to
the end of the progress line instead of starting a line of its own.
Finally, the status information provided by the progress bar is more or
less duplicated by log messages announcing as each component is started.
If we were willing and able to eliminate all DEBUG and INFO output
from the server startup sequence, we could keep the progress and still get
the DEBUG or INFO messages after startup. However, I think that's
unlikely. For example, I got ActiveMQ to agree not to emit a WARN message
if the necessary JMS tables are already available at startup, but it
didn't sound like they were prepared to forego that message entirely.
Aaron
> On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
> > Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
> >
> > - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
> > - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
> >
> > I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
> > not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Aaron
> >
> > On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on the format.
> >>
> >> I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this
> >> has been posted already.
> >>
> >> - Matt
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
> >> To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
> >> Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Nice! You rock!
> >>>
> >>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
> >>>>
> >>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level
> >>>> WARN
> >>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
> >>>> etc.
> >>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
> >>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
> >>>>
> >>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
> >>>> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and
> >>>> official
> >>>> releases.
> >>>>
> >>>> Aaron
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
How do I get progress bar *and* log level DEBUG?
geir
On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
>
> - I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
> - I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
>
> I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
> not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>> +1 on the format.
>>
>> I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this
>> has been posted already.
>>
>> - Matt
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
>> To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
>> Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
>>
>>
>>
>>> Nice! You rock!
>>>
>>> Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>
>>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
>>>>
>>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level
>>>> WARN
>>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
>>>> etc.
>>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>>>>
>>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
>>>> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and
>>>> official
>>>> releases.
>>>>
>>>> Aaron
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Okay, so based on this feedback thread,
- I'll change "-noprogress" to "-quiet"
- I'll leave "-v" and "-vv"
I think that's the best combination too. Being lazy myself, I'm
not ready for 2-3 large command line args to achieve "-v". :)
Thanks,
Aaron
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> +1 on the format.
>
> I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this has been posted already.
>
> - Matt
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
> To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
> Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
>
>
> > Nice! You rock!
> >
> > Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > > Okay, now you have the following options:
> > >
> > > java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
> > > java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
> > > java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
> > > java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
> > >
> > > The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
> > > builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and official
> > > releases.
> > >
> > > Aaron
> >
> >
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
+1 on the format.
I think I like -quite instead of -noprogress...not sure if this has been posted already.
- Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Genender" <jg...@savoirtech.com>
To: <de...@geronimo.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
> Nice! You rock!
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > Okay, now you have the following options:
> >
> > java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
> > java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
> > java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
> > java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
> >
> > The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
> > builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and official
> > releases.
> >
> > Aaron
>
>
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Nice! You rock!
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Okay, now you have the following options:
>
> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>
> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and official
> releases.
>
> Aaron
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Well, why don't you gather some more input and if there's a concensus we
can change them to whatever. The current values are constants at the top
of the o/a/g/system/main/Daemon class. However, note that the current
plumbing expects each value to be a single argument ("-loginfo" not
"-log INFO"), so it would be simpler to keep to that style.
Aaron
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> I like the idea of:
>
> java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log level WARN
> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Jul 5, 2005, at 6:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> On 7/5/2005 6:36 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> I like the idea of:
>
> java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log level
> WARN
> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
> etc.
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
I like -quiet and I also like -v and -vv. I think something like --
loglevel would be ok for a long version of -v, but I don't know if
the word loglevel it right. This isn't the full log level, but only
the log level used for console output. Maybe we should use --verbose
and --veryverbose.
-dain
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 6, 2005, at 2:36 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote, On 7/6/2005 4:39 AM:
>
>
>>
>> On Jul 5, 2005, at 9:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 7/5/2005 6:36 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
>>>>
>>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level
>>>> WARN
>>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
>>>> etc.
>>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>>>>
>>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for
>>>> developer builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots,
>>>> milestones, and official releases.
>>>>
>>>> Aaron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I like the idea of:
>>>
>>> java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log
>>> level WARN
>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server
>>> version, etc.
>>> java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
>>> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This is what I was going to suggest, except just having an
>> explicit set of flags and WARN as the default log level, since
>> it's my understanding these are independent degrees of freedom
>> (progress bar and log level...)
>>
>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress (very quiet, WARN)
>> java -jar server.jar (noisy startup...)
>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel INFO (you can guess...)
>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel DEBUG
>> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG
>>
>>
>>
> I am not fond of having a command line argument called noprogress.
>
That's fine. I meant to use "quiet" rather than "noprogress". Sorry.
My point wasn't about the name as much as having switches that
overlap as "quiet" and "loglevel" do above (they both shut off the
progress bar...)
So for your latter two examples, just add the -quiet flag to shut off
the progress bar, rather than it being a side effect of the -loglevel
switch...
geir
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote, On 7/6/2005 4:39 AM:
>
> On Jul 5, 2005, at 9:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> On 7/5/2005 6:36 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Okay, now you have the following options:
>>>
>>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
>>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
>>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>>>
>>> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
>>> builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and
>>> official releases.
>>>
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>>
>> I like the idea of:
>>
>> java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log level
>> WARN
>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
>> etc.
>> java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
>> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
>>
>
> This is what I was going to suggest, except just having an explicit
> set of flags and WARN as the default log level, since it's my
> understanding these are independent degrees of freedom (progress bar
> and log level...)
>
> java -jar server.jar -noprogress (very quiet, WARN)
> java -jar server.jar (noisy startup...)
> java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel INFO (you can guess...)
> java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel DEBUG
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG
>
>
I am not fond of having a command line argument called noprogress.
Regards,
Alan
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 5, 2005, at 9:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> On 7/5/2005 6:36 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>
>> Okay, now you have the following options:
>>
>> java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
>> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
>> java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>> java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>>
>> The server version printed will be not too useful for
>> developer builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots,
>> milestones, and official releases.
>>
>> Aaron
>>
>>
> I like the idea of:
>
> java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log level
> WARN
> java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version,
> etc.
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
> java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
>
This is what I was going to suggest, except just having an explicit
set of flags and WARN as the default log level, since it's my
understanding these are independent degrees of freedom (progress bar
and log level...)
java -jar server.jar -noprogress (very quiet, WARN)
java -jar server.jar (noisy startup...)
java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel INFO (you can guess...)
java -jar server.jar -noprogress -loglevel DEBUG
java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: New Startup Output, Mark 2
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On 7/5/2005 6:36 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Okay, now you have the following options:
>
>java -jar server.jar -noprogress Very quiet startup, log level WARN
>java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
>java -jar server.jar -v No progress, log level INFO
>java -jar server.jar -vv No progress, log level DEBUG
>
> The server version printed will be not too useful for developer
>builds, but should be meaningful for snapshots, milestones, and official
>releases.
>
>Aaron
>
>
I like the idea of:
java -jar server.jar -quiet Very quiet startup, log level WARN
java -jar server.jar Progress bar, server version, etc.
java -jar server.jar -loglevel INFO No progress, log level INFO
java -jar server.jar -loglevel DEBUG No progress, log level DEBUG
Regards,
Alan