jmeter-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Apache Excalibur Logger
Date Wed, 22 Aug 2012 22:44:48 GMT
Last try to convince you :-)

On Thursday, August 23, 2012, sebb wrote:

> On 22 August 2012 21:43, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:21 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 22 August 2012 17:52, Milamber <milamber@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> > philippe.mouawad@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Restarting the discussion about logger.
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree with sebb java.util.logging is not great compared to
> >> slf4j/logback
> >> >> , log4j or commons-logging.
> >> >>
> >> >> My opinion is slf4j/logback would be the best choice as it's:
> >> >>
> >> >>    - the most up to date
> >> >>    - is the next evolution of LOG4J for logback
> >> >>    - was build from commons-logging experience for SLF4J
> >> >>    - logback seems to have more features than log4j
> >> >>
> >>
> >> I don't see the point of replacing the existing logging.
> >> What benefit would we get?
> >>
> > Does current implementation support MDC or NDC ?
>
> No idea what they are.
>
>


http://veerasundar.com/blog/2009/11/log4j-mdc-mapped-diagnostic-context-example-code/

http://stackoverflow.com/search?q=%5Blog4j%5D+%2BMDC


Milamber wrote an article but it's in french.

> > Oth

er features  I see:
> >
> >    - Parameterized log messages  :
> >    http://slf4j.org/faq.html#logging_performance
>
> We already use the if enabled wrappers.
>
> More powerful as not String concat and cleaner logging

>    - Marker objects : see
> >    -
> >
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10766411/overriding-the-logging-methods-logger-warn-in-slf4j
> ,
> >
> >       - http://logback.qos.ch/manual/layouts.html#Evaluators
>
> Do we really need this functionality?
> Looks rather complicated to me.
>
> It could be helpful for debugging thread related issues

>
> >
> > What's wrong with the existing functionality?
> >>
> > it is based on a retired project (Excalibur). It kind of hurts me.
>
> Irrelevant if it works.


I disagree. For dev committers and contributors  it's important to have Up
to date and documented APi with lots of resources ( stackoverflow)

For new comers, they will look at what Libraries are used, too old ones car
fear or can be a negative point.

Furthermore are we sure performances of theseew libraries are not better ?
( you will kill this argument ;) )


> > Not much documentation on web, I had to search last time when
> implementing
> > 41788 and 53261. API is limited compared to Commons-logging, log4j ,
> slf4j
>
> In what way is it limited?
> AFAIK, it's similar to commons-logging.
>
> No there are limitations on appenders additions, you cannot add, you must
set them all, at least one issue i faced.



> > I remember when starting using jmeter (I knew at that time log4j,
> > commons-logging) I had to modify log level somewhere, I search a while
> > because it was a new mechanism to learn (had jmeter relied on existing
> conf
> > of log4j or other I would have found this very rapidly, ActiveMQ for
> > example uses commons-logging, slf4j and possibly logback).
> >
> >> Would we lose any functionality by changing?
> >>
> > I don't think so.
> > But maybe you should detail all the features and we could check.
>
> That's quite difficult to do.
>
> >>
> >> It took a lot of work to get everything set up properly; and will be a
> >> very major undertaking to change everything.
> >> It's not just changes to class import statements and creating a
> >> different logger.
> >> There's documentation, and the way we use properties to control
> >> logging different classes and packages.
> >> If that changes, it could break some user installations.
> >>
> >
> > I agree it changes but log4j, commons-logging, slf4j are such standard
> that
> > it's very easy to find info, for example look at stackoverflow
> statistics:
> >
> >    - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/slf4j : 390 questions
> >    - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/log4j : 2170 questions
> >    - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/logback : 320 questions
> >    - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/apache-commons-logging :
> 61
> >    questions
> >    - logkit, avalon, excalibur : 0 questions
> >
>
> So? AFAICT, most of that relates to using and implementing logging,
> rather than configuring logging levels, which is the main issue for
> end users.
>
> They also relate to configuring , what i am trying to sat is that there is
much more docs on these new libs as on excalibur one.
Regarding user, see my argument on contributors , plugin writers,
developpers

>
> > Users will also need to get learn a different way of controlling logging.
> >>
> >>
> > We could rely on underlying product documentation which is quite well
> known
> > (log4j , logback ) instead of creating our own mechanism .
> > We could then remove all Logging Configuration paragraph from
> > jmeter.properties.
> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps, some issue with the logback dual licences (EPL and LGPL). I'm
> >> not
> >> > sure if we can used the logback with only the choice of EPL licence...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The commons-logging and the Log4j are under AL2.0, seems better to
> use an
> >> > ASF product in an ASF product? ;-)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I think we should really remove dependency on Apache Excalibur.
> >>
> >> We still use parts of Excalibur for JDBC pooling.
> >>
> >> I don't see the point of pooling if you are testing JDBC; it then
> >> becomes as much a test of the pool rather than JDBC.
> >>
> > Don't understand this
> >
> >>
> >> If we do want to support pooling, it should be selectable.
> >> However I don't know if there is a standard Pooling API, so that might
> >> not be possible.
> >>
> >> Why not use commons-dbcp or tomcat-pool for this ?
>
> See separate thread.
>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards
> >> >>
> >> >> Philippe
> >> >> // Copying dialog from another thread:
> >> >>
> >> >> Philippe says
> >> >> >> As we are now in these big changes (static final, interface
> cleanup
> >> ...
> >> >>  )
> >> >> >> Sebb, milamber is it ok for you if I start migration to
> >> commons-logging
> >> >> ?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> Milamber says:
> >> >> > Why commons-loggings (not updated since 2008)?
> >> >>
> >> >> Sebb says:
> >> >> AIUI it's not been updated since it works; there has been no need to
> >> update
> >> >> it.
> >> >>
> >> >> > Log4J ?
> >> >>
> >> >> > or directly java.util.logging.*?
> >> >>
> >> >> That's broken, according to what I read.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hello Sebb,
> >> >> > My responses below.
> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> > Philippe
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:02 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On 23 January 2012 06:49, Philippe Mouawad <
> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > Regarding logging,
> >> >> >> > It CAN Go fast if we share work and each of us takes
one SRC
> >> folder.
> >> >> >> > It's à matter f search replace for 90%.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's still the same amount of work, no matter how many people
do
> it.
> >> >> >> [Possibly more, if you allow for co-ordination overheads]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Generally it's the last 10% that takes all the effort.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> > => I agree , I volunteer to do it if you agree after release.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Definitely not something to be started just before a release.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> => It was not my intention, it is just after the release.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Also, we would still need to keep the jars unless we rewrote
> >> >> >> OldSaveService - or made it optional.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Regarding pool i am not sure to  there is an datasourceelemnt
> That
> >> >> has à
> >> >> >> > Maxpool property and looking at code it seemed the  excalibur
> >> >> datasource
> >> >> >> > was using this property.
> >> >> >> > Commons jdbc BasicDatasource was looking very close to
it.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> >> > Philippe
> >> >> >> > On Monday, January 23, 2012, Anthony Johnson <ansoni@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:28 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> On 23 January 2012 01:46, Anthony Johnson <ansoni@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 8:29 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>> On 22 January 2012 13:04, Philippe Mouawad
<
> >> >> >> philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
>


-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message