Mark Thomas wrote:
Remy Maucherat wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fix some logging related memory leaks. This fixes 41272 and the root
-1. Getting a logger has, AFAIK, a possibly significant cost. Since
getting a RD is a very common option, this is not acceptable.
I took a look at the commons-logging code. The first call for a
context will be expensive as the logger has to be created. After that
it is:
- one call to getContextClassLoader() (via reflection)
- two hashtable look ups
- some wrapper code
I knew it used getContextClassLoader(). I didn't realise it was via
reflection so I agree with you about the performance hit.
This is still far more than what should happen (nothing). I did provide
suggestions to write an equivalent patch which would not suffer from the
problem, so I maintain my veto.
If you really want to fix this non issue (which will simply happen
elsewhere in more insidious form),
I don't view memory leaks and loggers for one context logging messages
for a different context a non-issue. Given all it takes for this to
occur is to put log4j in a webapp this is likely to affect a lot of
people - including me ;). I am happy to spend the time fixing these
issues and any others that crop up in the future.
All I'm asking in the end if you really want to do it for some reason is
that you find a mutually acceptable way.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
