On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Tibor Kiss <[email protected]> wrote:

> This is a great idea!
>
> I believe Python-SDK's logging could also be enhanced (a bit differently):
> Currently we are not instantiating the logger, just using the class what
> logging package provides.
> Shortcoming of this approach is that the user cannot set the log level on
> a per module basis as all log messages
> end up in the root level.
>

+1 to this. Python SDK needs to expands its logging capabilities. Filed [1]
for this.

Ahmet

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1825


>
> On 3/22/17, 5:46 AM, "Aviem Zur" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     +1 to what JB said.
>
>     Will just have to be documented well as if we provide no binding there
> will
>     be no logging out of the box unless the user adds a binding.
>
>     On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:24 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
>     wrote:
>
>     > Hi Aviem,
>     >
>     > Good point.
>     >
>     > I think, in our dependencies set, we should just depend to slf4j-api
> and
>     > let the
>     > user provides the binding he wants (slf4j-log4j12, slf4j-simple,
> whatever).
>     >
>     > We define a binding only with test scope in our modules.
>     >
>     > Regards
>     > JB
>     >
>     > On 03/22/2017 04:58 AM, Aviem Zur wrote:
>     > > Hi all,
>     > >
>     > > There have been a few reports lately (On JIRA [1] and on Slack)
> from
>     > users
>     > > regarding inconsistent loggers used across Beam's modules.
>     > >
>     > > While we use SLF4J, different modules use a different logger
> behind it
>     > > (JUL, log4j, etc)
>     > > So when people add a log4j.properties file to their classpath for
>     > instance,
>     > > they expect this to affect all of their dependencies on Beam
> modules, but
>     > > it doesn’t and they miss out on some logs they thought they would
> see.
>     > >
>     > > I think we should strive for consistency in which logger is used
> behind
>     > > SLF4J, and try to enforce this in our modules.
>     > > I for one think it should be slf4j-log4j. However, if performance
> of
>     > > logging is critical we might want to consider logback.
>     > >
>     > > Note: SLF4J will still be the facade for logging across the
> project. The
>     > > only change would be the logger SLF4J delegates to.
>     > >
>     > > Once we have something like this it would also be useful to add
>     > > documentation on logging in Beam to the website.
>     > >
>     > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1757
>     > >
>     >
>     > --
>     > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>     > [email protected]
>     > http://blog.nanthrax.net
>     > Talend - http://www.talend.com
>     >
>
>
>

Reply via email to