hi, +1 (see [1] and esp. [2]).
just if there are really a lot of instances of a class, we would see a noticeable performance impact -> we have to treat such cases differently. furthermore, it's possible to benefit from inheritance - e.g. in case of jul: protected final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(getClass().getName()); regards, gerhard [1] http://www.slf4j.org/faq.html#declared_static [2] http://wiki.apache.org/commons/Logging/StaticLog http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/8/20 Gurkan Erdogdu <[email protected]> > Hello folks, > > As you have already know, we have been using "static loggers" in our codes. > But > using those libraries in Java EE containers, problems have occured. > > > For example, in Tomcat, Loggers are configured per classloader. When > application > is undeployed all of the handlers of application loggers are removed. > Therefore, > after undeploying the first applications, other applications that use the > same > class are suffered from logging. i.e > > For example, > > private static final WebBeansLogger logger = ..... > > When first application is deployed, it sets logger. When it is undeplyed, > logger > is reset and no application is able to use it. > > I think to change all loggers from static to normal ? > > WDYT? > > Thanks; > > --Gurkan > > >
