On 23/09/2012 15:10, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 23.09.2012 14:56, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: >> 2012/9/23 <ma...@apache.org>: >>> Author: markt >>> Date: Sun Sep 23 11:37:48 2012 >>> New Revision: 1389023 >>> >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1389023&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Review from rjung >>> >>> Modified: >>> tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/valves/AccessLogValve.java >>> >>> Modified: >>> tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/valves/AccessLogValve.java >>> URL: >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/valves/AccessLogValve.java?rev=1389023&r1=1389022&r2=1389023&view=diff >>> >>> ============================================================================== >>> >>> --- tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/valves/AccessLogValve.java >>> (original) >>> +++ tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/valves/AccessLogValve.java >>> Sun Sep 23 11:37:48 2012 >>> @@ -948,7 +948,7 @@ public class AccessLogValve extends Valv >>> log(result); >>> >>> // TODO - Make this configurable >>> - if (result.length() < 256) { >>> + if (result.length() <= maxLogMessageBufferSize) { >>> result.clear(); >>> charBuffers.add(result); >>> } >>> @@ -1825,11 +1825,7 @@ public class AccessLogValve extends Valv >>> // second >>> buf.append(Long.toString(time / 1000)); >>> buf.append('.'); >>> - int remains = (int) (time % 1000); >>> - buf.append(Long.toString(remains / 100)); >>> - remains = remains % 100; >>> - buf.append(Long.toString(remains / 10)); >>> - buf.append(Long.toString(remains % 10)); >>> + buf.append(Long.toString(time % 1000)); >> >> The above change is plainly wrong. It loses leading zeros in the >> fractional part. >> E.g. it'll print 1060 msec as "1.60" sec (1600). >> >>> } >>> } >>> } > > Oups, sorry for my misleading advice. > > Will > > // Format modulo 1000 and include leading zeroes > buf.append(Long.toString(time % 1000 + 10000).substring(1)); > > be still better than the original code? I think using a formatter is > overkill for this simple king of leading zero's formatting and calling > append plus Long.toString() three times might still be worse than an > additional substring() which needs to allocate a new String object but > will share the underlying char array. > > Alternatively one could use an if-then-else chain depending on the size > of time%1000 and appending nothing, "0", "00" or "000" before appending > the Long.toString(time % 1000).
I'll restore the original and not worry about it until it crops up in the profiling results (if it crops up at all). Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
