logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Moore <jim.mo...@veritas.com>
Subject RE: Suggestions
Date Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:55:59 GMT
"is this really efficient"

Like most every other "efficiency" questions the answer is "It depends."
And the answer to EVERY efficiency qustion is "Design a good, clean, working
system FIRST, and only then worry about efficiency."

To give a simple answer to your question that reflects that, if you've got a
huge program with thousands of classes, then you'll have thousands of
Loggers -- but if you've got a program of that complexity, you probably need
all of them.  If you've got a small program of a few dozen classes, then
you'd only have a few dozen Loggers, which would have minimal impact.

But, as always, build a good program first, then profile.

-Jim Moore


________________________________

From: Garg, Nidhi [mailto:nidhi.garg@barco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 11:36 PM
To: 'Log4J Developers List'
Subject: Suggestions


Ive started a project using Log4J and have a question... 

a) Is it a good idea to have lots of loggers? I've read that people often
create a logger for each class, but is this really efficient?

b)I ve created the wrapper class for Logger class.N I am trying to use
configuration file  for property configurator.But in property configurator
we define properties like

log4j.rootLogger=ERROR, A1
log4j.appender.A1=org.apache.log4j.ConsoleAppender

while i ve created wrapper class of Logger in my own package..N i want user
shd not be aware with the prescence of Log4j...so is thr any way so that we
can replace org.apache.log4j with our own package path or name..


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


Mime
View raw message