Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 63037 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2010 16:43:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 17 Aug 2010 16:43:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 24763 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2010 16:43:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 24685 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2010 16:43:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact common-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 24677 invoked by uid 99); 17 Aug 2010 16:43:56 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:43:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.22] (HELO thor.apache.org) (140.211.11.22) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:43:39 +0000 Received: from thor (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thor.apache.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o7HGhHt8003413 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:43:18 GMT Message-ID: <20946511.396911282063397868.JavaMail.jira@thor> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:43:17 -0400 (EDT) From: "Tsz Wo (Nicholas), SZE (JIRA)" To: common-issues@hadoop.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-6884) Add LOG.isDebugEnabled() guard for each LOG.debug("...") In-Reply-To: <8688001.34681280270784520.JavaMail.jira@thor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-6884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12899462#action_12899462 ] Tsz Wo (Nicholas), SZE commented on HADOOP-6884: ------------------------------------------------ For aspectj, first of all, we currently don't use aspectj in Hadoop except for testing. I beg there are people against using aspectj or other byte-code rewriting technique on the non-testing codes since it is hard to debug. Let's be academic (as what I see in this issue) and ignore the statement above. I cannot see a simple solution on using aspectj. Clearly, if we define a point cut per LOG.debug(..), aspectj will works but this is too much of works and, in some cases, we need to change the codes in order to define a point cut. For the people suggesting aspectj and saying that it is simple, could you please provide a simple example? I heard one suggestion from Luke yesterday. He claimed we could use the "around" advice. However, it seems to me that around does not prevent parameter evaluation. I have not tested it yet. > Add LOG.isDebugEnabled() guard for each LOG.debug("...") > -------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HADOOP-6884 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-6884 > Project: Hadoop Common > Issue Type: Improvement > Affects Versions: 0.22.0 > Reporter: Erik Steffl > Assignee: Erik Steffl > Fix For: 0.22.0 > > Attachments: HADOOP-6884-0.22-1.patch, HADOOP-6884-0.22.patch > > > Each LOG.debug("...") should be executed only if LOG.isDebugEnabled() is true, in some cases it's expensive to construct the string that is being printed to log. It's much easier to always use LOG.isDebugEnabled() because it's easier to check (rather than in each case reason whether it's necessary or not). -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.