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

List:       log4j-dev
Subject:    RE: Change behaviour on Priorities
From:       Mark Douglas <Mark_Douglas () systemsunion ! com>
Date:       2001-08-22 9:02:39
[Download RAW message or body]

Arendt,

I too requested this when I first started using log4j.  It seemed the
obvious way that things should work.  I was shouted down and told not to try
and use log4j as it was not intended to be used.

The only solution is to use the PriorityMatchFilter to select the priorities
you require.  But as you point out, there is a performance hit in doing
this.

I have now been using log4j for some time, and would still love to be able
to enable priorities on an individual basis without using filters
(especially as I have created my own priorities as you have), but I don't
think this is likely to happen.  Although I think it would be a neater
solution, there are just too many people out there who like it the way it
is.

Another solution is to modify the source to suit your needs.  I looked at
doing this, but the nightmare of upgrading to newer versions of log4j put me
off.

Don't get me wrong, I think log4j is a fantastic tool, I just wish it worked
the way we (Arendt and myself) would like it to.

(Please someone reply and prove me completely wrong and tell me how this is
done).

Cheers,

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Arendt Frank [mailto:Frank.Arendt@swisslife.ch]
Sent: 21 August 2001 18:06
To: 'log4j-user@jakarta.apache.org'; 'log4j-dev@jakarta.apache.org'
Subject: Change behavior on Priorities 


Hello,

we have added additional priorities to our log4j. We would like to change
the behaviour of log4J that all (lower) priorities are activated for a
category. Instead we would like to activate the priorities individually for
each category despite of any rating.

One way to do it, would be to overwrite Priorities.isGreaterOrEqual() or to
replace it completly with a new method  Priorities.isEqual().

Both is either not recommended or means to change the core code.

The PriorityMatchFilter seem to be a solution, but i have concerns regarding
perfomance on this. This is executed when the complete logging event is
already created.

Do you have any other idea how to get to our goal? 

Thanks.

Frank 


>>> Rentenanstalt/Swiss Life - Official Partner Expo.02 <<<

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

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

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