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, 08 May 2013 21:18:13 GMT
Hello,
I bump this one as since a while we have slf4j as a dependency.

Regards
Philippe

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:01 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 22 August 2012 23:44, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.mouawad@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 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/
>
> I see, basically a map of variables that can be added to log messages.
>
> > 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.
> >
>
Yes but don't you think it is a bad thing to have libraries in End Of Life
?
It like using JDK1.4 no ?

> >
> > I disagree. For dev committers and contributors  it's important to have
> Up
> > to date and documented APi with lots of resources ( stackoverflow)
>
> There are plenty of examples of the use of logging in the code.
> Anyone who glances at more than a few classes will see how logging is used.
>
> > For new comers, they will look at what Libraries are used, too old ones
> car
> > fear or can be a negative point.
>
> I don't agree.
> Equally if a brand-new library is used, how well has it been tested?
>
> Yes but log4j, logback are hugely tested

> > Furthermore are we sure performances of theseew libraries are not better
> ?
> > ( you will kill this argument ;) )
>
> Are we sure they are not worse? Especially if they support a lot of
> special features.
>
> Yes


> But regardless, the effect on a test run is what counts.
>
> >
> >> > 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.
>
> Sorry, I don't follow.
>
> Look at Log Viewer code changes:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41788


> >
> >
> >> > 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.
>
> The only configuration that the end-user needs to do is to set the log
> level for the package(s).
>
It would be the same for log4j, logback

>
> That aspect of configuration is quite sophisticated in Avalon.
> As well as quite easy to use (and trivial for developers, as the name
> is automatically created from the class name).
>
Same for  log4j, logback

>
> How would that work in other logging implementations?
> It's important that logging can be easily selectively enabled.
>
> Same for  log4j, logback


> > 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.
>



-- 
Cordialement.
Philippe Mouawad.

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