river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Trasuk <tras...@stratuscom.com>
Subject Re: [Discuss] River and logging
Date Thu, 13 Feb 2014 07:03:57 GMT

It would be good to externalize and internationalize the messages too.


Greg Trasuk.

On Feb 12, 2014, at 6:33 PM, Dennis Reedy <dennis.reedy@gmail.com> wrote:

> While we're bringing up topics to discuss, I thought I'd throw this one out there. Deploying
systems into production (or just into serious test mode) always brings up one issue pretty
much consistently. What to do about logging? The same questions/issues always seem to come
> - How do I know what went wrong and where?
> - How do I get access to the service logs being created at each individual machine? 
> - Can I trace an invocation across services (that might be on different machines) using
log messages, and how?
> I've transitioned over to SLF4J sometime ago, and found the options available using either
Logback or Log4J to completely outshine any capabilities of java.util.logging (j.u.l), and
start to make the above questions addressable (without having to write your own customized
logging framework). Some of the top advatanges I've found are:
> - Pick the logging system at deploy tie (Logback,Log4J, j.u.l)
> - Choice of appenders that are available to do log consolidation & management
> - Better configuration for logging and loggers
> - Having mapped diagnostic context available (if the underlying logging system supports
it as logback and log4J do)
> - Performance advantages that logabck and Log4J offer
> For River to be a key player in the enterprise, it has to be able to use logging framework
that allows better management, visibility and control. For that reason I'd like to suggest
that we move River away from j.u.l to SLF4J.
> Regards
> Dennis

View raw message