[jira] [Commented] (OAK-4542) PerfLogger should also allow a threshold to log at INFO

["Vikas Saurabh (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15365854#comment-15365854 ] 

Vikas Saurabh commented on OAK-4542:
------------------------------------

{{PerfLogger}} currently tries best to return early if log level isn't DEBUG or TRACE. So, if a client wants to utilize this improvement, they'd probably need to flag the intent at PerfLogger.start() too ... but I think it'd be still be a bad idea to log message in start() for INFO intent.

So, for DEBUG and TRACE, the behavior shall remain the same. BUT, for start(msg, true /*logAtInfoToo*/), we'd just return time but not log message -- so, the alternative start would simply be start(true /*logAtInfoToo*/). Updating end() is rather simple.

[~chetanm], does this seem like a fair way to move forward?

> PerfLogger should also allow a threshold to log at INFO
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-4542
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4542
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>            Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4, monitoring, performance
>
> Currently, {{PerfLogger}} logs at DEBUG if time spent in operation is more that threshold ms.
> We should also be able to have a second level threshold of time, beyond which the log should happen at INFO. It helps to catch cases for which the timing gets too poor at the onset of some performance issue and by the time of investigation (opportunity to add DEBUG logger) is too late already.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)