hadoop-common-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tsuyoshi Ozawa (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (HADOOP-12428) Inconsistency between log-level guards and statements
Date Tue, 22 Sep 2015 03:49:04 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12428?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel

Tsuyoshi Ozawa updated HADOOP-12428:
    Summary: Inconsistency between log-level guards and statements  (was: Consistent log severity
level guards and statements in MapReduce project)

> Inconsistency between log-level guards and statements
> -----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HADOOP-12428
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12428
>             Project: Hadoop Common
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Jackie Chang
>            Assignee: Jagadesh Kiran N
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: BB2015-05-TBR
>         Attachments: HADOOP-9995-00.patch, HADOOP-9995.patch, MAPREDUCE-6468-01.patch,
MAPREDUCE-6468-02.patch, MAPREDUCE-6468-03.patch, MAPREDUCE-6468-04.patch
> Developers use logs to do in-house debugging. These log statements are later demoted
to less severe levels and usually are guarded by their matching severity levels. However,
we do see inconsistencies in trunk. A log statement like 
> {code}
>        if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
>         LOG.info("Assigned container (" + allocated + ") "
> {code}
> doesn't make much sense because the log message is actually only printed out in DEBUG-level.
We do see previous issues tried to correct this inconsistency. I am proposing a comprehensive
correction over trunk.
> Doug Cutting pointed it out in HADOOP-312: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-312?focusedCommentId=12429498&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-12429498
> HDFS-1611 also corrected this inconsistency.
> This could have been avoided by switching from log4j to slf4j's {} format like CASSANDRA-625
(2010/3) and ZOOKEEPER-850 (2012/1), which gives cleaner code and slightly higher performance.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message