Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-log4j-user-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 38620 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2002 13:28:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2002 13:28:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 10698 invoked by uid 97); 30 Aug 2002 13:28:31 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-log4j-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 10646 invoked by uid 97); 30 Aug 2002 13:28:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact log4j-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Log4J Users List" Reply-To: "Log4J Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list log4j-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 10557 invoked by uid 98); 30 Aug 2002 13:28:30 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020830152556.029ce720@mail.qos.ch> X-Sender: ceki@mail.qos.ch X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 15:28:04 +0200 To: "Log4J Users List" From: Ceki =?iso-8859-1?Q?G=FClc=FC?= Subject: Re: UNIX file handler problem used up on log4j log files In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 08:52 30.08.2002 -0400, you wrote: >I have a problem with file handler in UNIX. It is related to log4j, but may >not caused by it. > >There are two web applications running, both using log4j. One is >Solaris/Weblogic and the other >Solaris/iPlanet. The WL one never had problem with file logging. But the >iPlanet always will have overflow file handler issue and eventually after >days the UNIX file resources is used up and appl. get locked. > >I understand log4j is thread safe. I also checked the code of log4j. It >seems that the files (appenders) get opened and kept open until >specifically get reset() or close(). My question is that > >(a) Should we close the appenders each event is logged? Or we should >justleave them open. No, that would be excruciatingly slow. >(b) For the file hander of UNIX, for one file (appender) why would it use >multiple handler for one file? why not use kind of pooling access to the >file. How do you configure the appenders? Do you dynamically create a large number of appenders without ever closing them? >Please clarify if I have any misunderstandins. > > >Tony Yan -- Ceki -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: