lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Solr Logging
Date Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:15:59 GMT
Cool.  I'm almost done with a refactor to commons-logging.  I will  
post the patch soon.

And I totally agree on the sentiment of configuration vs. writing code  
(I had to do the same thing as you) just to handle something like  
logging.


On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:00 PM, Will Johnson wrote:

> (putting on flame suit)
>
> I'd be in favor seeing is how I spent a good bit of time 2 months ago
> writing JUL handlers and log managers to forward log messages to our  
> logging
> framework (log4j).  Pretty much any alternative (Commons, Log4j,  
> SLF4J) is
> better since all of them allow you to _configure_ your underlying
> implementation (including JUL if that's what you're into).  JUL on  
> the other
> hand ~requires you to write code to switch logging implementations  
> or even
> do basic things like rotate log files.  SLF4J seems especially slim  
> and nice
> these days but really anything is better than JUL.
>
> If others are really serious about it, I'd be happy to help the  
> cause.  It
> should be a fairly quick refactor and we could leave the default  
> configured
> logger as JUL via whatever framework we end up going with
>
> - will
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:48 AM
> To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Solr Logging
>
> Anyone have good tips on working w/ java.util.logging (JUL)?  For one,
> the configuration seems to be per JVM, which isn't all that useful in
> a webapp environment.
> http://www.crazysquirrel.com/computing/java/logging.jspx
>  has some tips for Tomcat, but I am using Jetty.  Not too mention, it
> seems, that if one wants to implement their own Handler, they have to
> somehow figure out how to get it in the right classloader, since the
> JVM classloader can't seem to find it if it is packaged in a WAR.
>
> I know logging is sometimes a religious debate, but would others
> consider a patch that switched Solr to use log4j?  Or, commons-
> logging?  I just don't think JUL is up to snuff when it comes to
> logging.  It's a PITA to configure, is not flexible, doesn't play nice
> with other logging systems and, all in all, just seems like crappy
> design by committee where the lowest common denominator won out.
>
> The switch is quite painless, and the former offers a lot more
> flexibility, while the latter allows one to plugin whatever they see
> fit.  I will work up a patch so people can at least see the options.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Grant
>

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll

Lucene Helpful Hints:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ







Mime
View raw message