geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: Logging code and Garbage Collection
Date Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:37:29 GMT
Are there concrete metrics which suggest that isXEnabled() is horribly 
slow?  If so, then it sounds like we should write a simple utility to 
perform lazy caching of this information... but I was under the 
impression that the isXEnabled() methods were not so slow, but I have 
not profiled them.

Do we need to worry about this now?

What doe the Log4j folks have to say about this?


On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 10:26  PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

>> From: Jason Dillon []
>> I would depend on how it was cached.  If you mean if a method
>> traces or
>> debugs more than once, it should definitely create a local
>> variable to
>> cache if the level is enabled, but if you mean for a larger scoped
>> cache, this could make it hard to debug a running server, as you can
>> always tweak the active levels at runtime.
> Local variable, a given.
> The thing is, the isXEnabled() method gets called a gazillion times to
> detect the one time that the level was bumped up, which happends very
> infrequently. I'm assuming this goes through a synchronized block as
> well, add yet more ns to the call. The runtime feature is useful but 
> has
> a price.
> Some form of lazy caching scheme may be appropriate, provided checking
> invalidation is quicker than the call to isXEnabled().
> --
> Jeremy

View raw message