Hello Team,

I am happy to do the work of reviewing all Parquet logging, but I need help
getting the work committed.

Fokko Driesprong has been a wonderfully ally in helping me get incremental
improvements into Parquet, but I wonder if there's anyone else that can
share in the load.

Thanks,
David

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:55 AM Michael Heuer <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello David,
>
> As I mentioned on PARQUET-1758, we have been frustrated by overly verbose
> logging in Parquet for a long time.  Various workarounds have been more or
> less successful, e.g.
>
> https://github.com/bigdatagenomics/adam/issues/851 <
> https://github.com/bigdatagenomics/adam/issues/851>
>
> I would support a move making Parquet a silent partner.  :)
>
>    michael
>
>
> > On Jan 23, 2020, at 10:25 AM, David Mollitor <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Team,
> >
> > I have been a consumer of Apache Parquet through Apache Hive for several
> > years now.  For a long time, logging in Parquet has been pretty painful.
> > Some of the logging was going to STDOUT and some was going to Log4J.
> > Overall, though the framework has been too verbose, spewing many log
> lines
> > about internal details of Parquet I don't understand.
> >
> > The logging has gotten a lot better with recent releases moving solidly
> > into SLF4J.  That is awesome and very welcomed.  However, (opinion
> alert) I
> > think the logging is still too verbose.  I think Parquet should be a
> silent
> > partner in data processing.  If everything is going well, it should be
> > silent (DEBUG level logging).  If things are going wrong, it should throw
> > an Exception.
> >
> > If an operator suspects Parquet is the issue (and that's rarely the first
> > thing to check), they can set the logging for all of the Loggers in the
> > entire Parquet package (org.apache.parquet) to DEBUG to get the required
> > information.  Not to mention, the less logging it does, the faster it
> will
> > be.
> >
> > I've opened this discussion because I've got two PRs related to this
> topic
> > ready to go:
> >
> > PARQUET-1758
> > PARQUET-1761
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
>
>

Reply via email to