I gotcha, if there is interest Id like to get a pr started.

On Mon, May 7, 2018, 1:25 PM Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Log4j and Log4net don't share any code, just similar architectures. As for
> why we haven't merged that into log4net, that may because it either was
> never noticed or the authors never attempted to donate it upstream in the
> first place.
>
> On 7 May 2018 at 12:22, William Davis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ok then, so are the same Async Appenders available in Log4Net that are in
> > Log4j ?
> > Here are some one I'm using:
> > https://github.com/cjbhaines/Log4Net.Async
> > (my .net standard port: https://github.com/wjdavis5/Log4Net.Async)
> > Also been looking into an Async Buffering Appender. Just seems we could
> get
> > so much more value out of the core product if these were rolled in. (And
> I
> > wouldnt have to struggle to get .net core support from ill maintained
> > repos.)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Oh, no worries, you're on the correct list!
> > >
> > > On 7 May 2018 at 09:02, William Davis <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry I meant to send this to the Log4Net distro
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Like the Kafka appender's async option? Or like the async logger
> and
> > > > > appenders?
> > > > >
> > > > > On 7 May 2018 at 07:38, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Log4j core provides about 4 flavours of async logging, several of
> > > which
> > > > > > use non-blocking data structures.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can you link to the ones you think should be included?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Remko
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves
> > > http://picocli.info
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On May 7, 2018, at 14:15, William Davis <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've noticed that there are several Async implementations of
> > > standard
> > > > > > > appenders out in the wild. Is there a reason none of these have
> > > made
> > > > > > there
> > > > > > > way into the core product? Is it just b/c no one has taken the
> > time
> > > > to
> > > > > > do a
> > > > > > > pull request, or is there some other reason?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've had several projects where we need the non-blocking nature
> > of
> > > > > these
> > > > > > > appenders to achieve desired performance.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>

Reply via email to