[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11934?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16371042#comment-16371042 ]
Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-11934: ------------------------------------- Migrating from slf4j to log4j2, if that idea has support, should only happen in master. I think it's too drastic a change for a minor release. > Visit Solr logging, it's too noisy. > ----------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-11934 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11934 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Improvement > Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) > Reporter: Erick Erickson > Assignee: Erick Erickson > Priority: Major > > I think we have way too much INFO level logging. Or, perhaps more correctly, > Solr logging needs to be examined and messages logged at an appropriate level. > We log every update at an INFO level for instance. But I think we log LIR at > INFO as well. As a sysadmin I don't care to have my logs polluted with a > message for every update, but if I'm trying to keep my system healthy I want > to see LIR messages and try to understand why. > Plus, in large installations logging at INFO level is creating a _LOT_ of > files. > What I want to discuss on this JIRA is > 1> What kinds of messages do we want log at WARN, INFO, DEBUG, and TRACE > levels? > 2> Who's the audience at each level? For a running system that's functioning, > sysops folks would really like WARN messages that mean something need > attention for instance. If I'm troubleshooting should I turn on INFO? DEBUG? > TRACE? > So let's say we get some kind of agreement as to the above. Then I propose > three things > 1> Someone (and probably me but all help gratefully accepted) needs to go > through our logging and assign appropriate levels. This will take quite a > while, I intend to work on it in small chunks. > 2> Actually answer whether unnecessary objects are created when something > like log.info("whatever {}", someObjectOrMethodCall); is invoked. Is this > independent on the logging implementation used? The SLF4J and log4j seem a > bit contradictory. > 3> Maybe regularize log, logger, LOG as variable names, but that's a nit. > As a tactical approach, I suggest we tag each LoggerFactory.getLogger in > files we work on with //SOLR-(whatever number is assigned when I create > this). We can remove them all later, but since I expect to approach this > piecemeal it'd be nice to keep track of which files have been done already. > Finally, I really really really don't want to do this all at once. There are > 5-6 thousand log messages. Even at 1,000 a week that's 6 weeks, even starting > now it would probably span the 7.3 release. > This will probably be an umbrella issue so we can keep all the commits > straight and people can volunteer to "fix the files in core" as a separate > piece of work (hint). > There are several existing JIRAs about logging in general, let's link them in > here as well. > Let the discussion begin! -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org