qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John O'Hara" <john.r.oh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: C++ logging - anyone heard of pantheios?
Date Thu, 10 May 2007 14:50:49 GMT
Do you want to think about localisation of log messages at this point?

How do you pro's do that anyway :-) ?

John

On 10/05/07, Alan Conway <aconway@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 00:38 +0100, John O'Hara wrote:
> > Fancy backends?
> >
> > Its "only" logging - I've found the entire world resolves down to files
> and
> > syslog; any fanciness tends to go the way of the dinosaur by being too
> > complex for joe average </speaking-from-bitter-experience>
> >
> > With files (pipes) and syslog its amazing what you can do.
> >
> > I do like the rlog idea -- seems very "dtrace" in its conception.  Cool,
> but
> > too cool for its own good?
> > As you say, thread nastiness may await where a hardware platform cant
> > replace a function pointer in one atomic memory write.
>
> Yup, I've decided going for simplicity and replacability. Simple
> one-macro QPID_LOG API with two initial implementations, rlog and
> braindead global trace level int to keep Apache happy (rlog is LGPL.) We
> can replace/extend the set of logging options any time.
>
> Both of these provide the minimal if (int/pointer-compare) {} overhead
> for disabled log statements. The pantheios API is dead clever but it's
> overhead for unlogged calls is no better, it has a bizzaro build system
> and hasn't been packaged in a form we could depend on so would be work
> to integrate. Its formatting performance for logged calls is better but
> right now I want to get something working ASAP that won't kill
> performance with logging off and we can improve later if need be.
>
>

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