RE: Log4J - Downsides?

["Calvin Yu" <cyu@mail.com>]

The commons logging package is indeed a good choice.  I'm working on a project here where we have 1.1 applets, a 1.4 application, and a 1.2 server all sharing code which would of not been possible without this package.

I believe that most Jakarta projects will be using these interfaces in the future.

Calvin

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Caswell" <stevencaswell@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 19:28:19 -0400
To:  <roncordell@attbi.com>, <ajug-members@www.ajug.org>
Subject: RE: Log4J - Downsides?


> One obvious disadvantage of the jdk1.4 log facility is that it is only
> available with jdk1.4, whereas log4j is available on any recent jdk.
> 
> I've been using log4j for a while and I love it. One thing I have done
> is to adopt the Apache Jakarta common-logging package. This package
> defines a logging interface that an application can program to without
> having to commit to a particular logging implementation. By coding to
> the commons-logging interface, you can plug in your logging package of
> choice, as long as its architecture translates reasonably to the
> interface. Currently the commons-logging package contains implementation
> translations to log4j and the jdk1.4 logging package.
> 
> Check out commons-logging at
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/logging.html
> 
> 
> Steven Caswell
> steven@caswell.name
> a.k.a Mungo Knotwise of Michel Delving
> "One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them..."
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ron Cordell [mailto:roncordell@attbi.com] 
> > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 1:03 PM
> > To: ajug-members@www.ajug.org
> > Subject: Re: Log4J - Downsides?
> > 
> > 
> > Can anyone comment on the advantages/disadvantages of Log4J 
> > compared to the 
> > jdk1.4 log facility?
> > 
> > Ron Cordell
> > 
> > 
> > On Friday 12 April 2002 01:17 pm, Michael S Young wrote:
> > > The only "problem" I've noticed with log4j is...
> > >
> > > If you reload the config file (through 
> > > PropertyConfigurator.configure() or
> > > configureAndWatch() API), a _small_ number events might get 
> > lost as the
> > > appenders are closed and reopened.  Log4j will write an 
> > error to stderr
> > > stating that it couldn't send the event(s) to the 
> > appender-so at least you
> > > know it is happening.
> > > In exchange for being able to dynamically configure the 
> > logging behavior
> > > with the config file, I don't see this as a major problem.
> > >
> > > If you can't afford to lose any events, you can request a 
> > > smaller-scale change by calling Category.setPriority(). I 
> > haven't seen 
> > > this API lose events yet.
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > > P.S. - I happened to be using the RollingFileAppender, but I assume 
> > > the problem would occur with any appender.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Rogers" <ironstack2000@hotmail.com> on 04/12/2002 11:52:18 AM
> > >
> > > To:    ajug-members@www.ajug.org
> > > cc:
> > > Subject:    Log4J - Downsides?
> > >
> > >
> > > Going to pitch using log4j to my company next week.
> > > I've tried it out within some of the existing code and seems to be 
> > > great.
> > >
> > > However, has anyone seen any problems using this API?
> > > Things like performance issues, security...
> > >
> > > This will used with servlets, and other backend code, 
> > running on JRun 
> > > 2.3.2
> > >
> > >
> > > My company is open-source unfriendly to start with, so it 
> > will be an 
> > > uphill fight..
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: 
> > http://messenger.msn.com
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> 
> 

-- 

_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup