[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       log4j-dev
Subject:    [jira] [Closed] (LOG4J2-218) Improve documentation for FileAppender and basic use cases
From:       "Remko Popma (JIRA)" <jira () apache ! org>
Date:       2013-04-28 17:40:16
Message-ID: JIRA.12644278.1366778921123.239523.1367170816370 () arcas
[Download RAW message or body]


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-218?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel \
]

Remko Popma closed LOG4J2-218.
------------------------------

    
> Improve documentation for FileAppender and basic use cases
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Key: LOG4J2-218
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-218
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Documentation
> Affects Versions: 2.0-beta5
> Reporter: Remko Popma
> 
> On the log4j-user mailing list, Peter DePasquale pointed out that with the default \
> values for FileAppender (bufferedIO="true" and immediateFlush="false"), a small \
> test program does not actually write to disk. Especially for novice users this can \
> be frustrating and hard to solve. I propose to add a cautionary note to the docs \
> for all appenders that are buffered. (It is also not completely clear that the \
> default for immediateFlush is false.) Also, for the reason above, the example \
> configuration in the docs don't "work out of the box". Most users will copy the \
> example configuration when they start with log4j2 (that's what I did...) In order \
> to make everyone's first impression as smooth as possible I propose we add either \
> bufferedIO="false" or immediateFlush="true" to all relevant example configurations. \
>  In addition, (and people may disagree with me on this) I think the sample \
> configurations should avoid using location-based layouts like %C, %M, %location \
> etc.  That is, unless the sample demonstrates the location-based capabilities, of \
> course. The performance impact of location-based layouts is quite large (something \
> like 5x slower), and I'd hate to give people the first impression that log4j2 is \
> slow because of our own example configs... Here is the sample File configuration in \
> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/appenders.html#FileAppender with my \
> proposed changes: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <configuration status="warn" name="MyApp" packages="">
> <appenders>
> <File name="MyFile" fileName="logs/app.log" immediateFlush="true">  <!-- flush -->
> <PatternLayout>
> <pattern>%d %p %c{1.} [%t] %m%n</pattern> <!-- avoid location %C in examples -->
> </PatternLayout>
> </File>
> </appenders>
> <loggers>
> <root level="error"><!-- mandatory root logger -->
> <appender-ref ref="MyFile"/>
> </root>
> </loggers>
> </configuration>

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

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


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]