On 22-03-2012 08:50, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 Mar 2012 21:18:37 Marco Schulze wrote:
>> There are basically two big concerns regarding logging in fred:
>>
>> - Readability and code clutter, which was my original questioning;
>> - Raw throughput, as raised by toad.
>>
>> Point 1 could mostly be solved by removing any traces of logMINOR and
>> logDEBUG on all but the few places where generating messages to be
>> logged brings noticeable slowdown. That'd be enough, but, personally,
>> the mess that the logging backend is does warrant a replacement.
>> According to toad, the current system needs log{MINOR,DEBUG} to function
>> in a timely manner. Based on this, I think we all agree a replacement is
>> desirable.
>>
>> Logging has a few additional requirements:
>>
>> - Log rotation (possibly live);
>> - Reentrant;
>> - Per-class filtering;
>> - Specific information in log (class-name, for example).
>>
>> Now, _any_ library which fits would make me happy, as long as they agree
>> to two points:
>>
>> - Either lightweight or with optional features. Else, it would only
>> transfer bloat to freenet-ext.jar. For example: log2socket, config
>> management and multiple logging instances;
>> - Implementable in a few LoC. Specially, it shouldn't need specialized
>> Formatter and Writer.
>>
>> Plus, it should be fast.
>>
>> From the quick research I made (yep, too many lists):
>>
>> - SLF4J already fails on point one: it is simply a wrapper;
>> - The Java logging API fails on point two: specialized classes would
>> have to be written to deal with log rotation, per-class filtering and
>> formatting, plus a wrapper for Logger.{info,warning,...}() methods.
>> Exactly the same as a custom logger, with one more dependency and using
>> more LoC;
> No dependancies, it's part of the JDK, isn't it?
More classes need to be loaded at startup. It's just me thinking too much.
>
> However, if it's not a clearer/simpler API, it probably doesn't make much
> sense.
>
>> - Log4J seems to fail on point one - it only lacks a button that brings
>> back the dead. It seems interesting, and I haven't dropped this yet.
>>
>> In either case (custom or external), log* would be banished. Forever.
> I don't follow. You object to using a separate logs folder?
log* == log{MINOR,DEBUG}, not the logs folder.
