logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [log4j 1.x] Batch-sending with SMTPAppender
Date Wed, 16 Nov 2016 22:45:08 GMT
If you do look at Log4j2 it would be great if you could give us feedback on
what is missing for your use case. I or others can help turn things around
quickly to make Log4j 2 even better.

Gary

On Nov 16, 2016 2:33 PM, "Christopher Schultz" <chris@christopherschultz.net>
wrote:

> Scott,
>
> On 11/16/16 2:09 PM, Scott Harrington wrote:
> >>> On 11/16/16 9:49 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >>>> First, I have to say that Log4j 1 reached end-of-life over a year
> >>>> ago. We recommend you upgrade to Log4j 2.
> >>>
> >>> Fair enough. I'm not quite there, yet. I suspect that log4j 2 will have
> >>> the same issue, though.
> >>
> >> I don’t know how to configure a TriggeringEventEvaluator in Log4j 1
> >> but I’d bet google does ;-)
> >
> > Chris: I have a ThrottledSMTPApppender subclass that I used for years
> > under Log4j 1.x, it's very small but was somewhat tricky; it starts a
> > "flusher" thread and attaches a shutdown hook to drain before exit.
> > There is a TriggeringEventEvaluator that always returns false. There is
> > a configureable "initialDelay" (default 10 seconds) and
> > "messageInterval" (default 60 seconds).
>
> That sounds cool, but maybe overkill if I can get the
> TriggeringEventEvaluator working with the stock log4j distro.
>
> (It looks like I'll need to write my own NeverTriggerEventEvaluator to
> do that. It looks trivial so I'll try that first.)
>
> > I've since moved up to Log4j 2, and you are correct that Log4j 2 didn't
> > do throttling/batching quite like I wanted, so I have a "ThrottledSMTP"
> > Plugin for Log4j 2.
>
> :)
>
> > There was some discussion of this at LOG4J2-252, which is still open.
> > I'll attach my two variants to that ticket with the hope they may be
> > useful as-is to you or to others. However I don't have the time in
> > foreseeable future to prepare the proper unit test and documentation
> > that would be required to make it part of official Log4j2.
>
> Understood. If I (a) go down the ThrottledSMTPAppender route and (b)
> move to log4j 2, I may finish-off that work. It's a long-shot, though.
>
> I really appreciate the feedback, though.
>
> -chris
>
>

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