My non-virtual machine of choice is a linux system. It's DNS provider
(in the system libraries) doesn't log failures directly.
I can't understand why it should be different for my virtual machine.
Certainly no other JVM's do this and we should be striving to maintain
behaviour that isn't going to surprise/confuse users[0].
My operating system provides a number of specialist tools for
diagnosing/resolving (pardon the pun) DNS problems, I'd rather use them
for this task than burden the jvm with this task. They will undoubtedly
do a better job because that is their only job.
I realise that this is an argument for not having logging on by
default. It is not an argument for not having logging at all.
Just my 0.02 GBP.
Regards,
Mark.
[0] There may be times when the greater good is served by breaking this
rule - surprising users not confusing them ;-) - but I don't think
this is one of them.
On 8 June 2006 at 20:03, "Alexei Zakharov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Once again. DNS provider does not look like another math lib. Yes, it
> is a part of JVM. But it is a network application nevetheless like ftp
> client, icq or whatever. It needs to warn people about some network
> conditions and events without self-termination. It has maximum one
> user-level log message (nano- or microseconds) per several network
> transactions (can last many seconds). I don't see any reasonable
> motivation to remove such messages. We won't get any performance
> impact. Only reduce the usability of the system by doing this.
>
> 2006/6/8, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I can't recall my jvms ever logging that way for critical stuff - they
> > usually just throw errors, right?
> >
> > Alexei Zakharov wrote:
> > > People, have compassion on critical error/info messages at least (>=
> > > Level.WARNING) . This is not a DEBUG logging, this is useful stuff for
> > > end user!
> > >
> > > 2006/6/8, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Tim Ellison wrote:
> > >> > Resurrecting this thread, with some trepidation...
> > >> >
> > >> > We went round the houses a bit, but did we reach a conclusion to the
> > >> > questions you posed?
> > >>
> > >> Sadly, no, it doesn't seem so.
> > >>
> > >> I was hoping that Aspect-Master-George might give us some hints...
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm eager to fix-up the DNS provider code.
> > >>
> > >> Is there something driving that other than the desire to "put it to
> > >> bed"? (Just curious)
> > >>
> > >> Can you just comment the stuff out? (or I can - I'll be happy to)
> > >>
> > >> geir
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards,
> > >> > Tim
> > >> >
> > >> > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > >> >> Seems like there is an important issue here, but the discussion can't
> > >> >> seem to escape out of the thicket of the example.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 1) Should we allow any logging from within the classlibrary?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> 2) How should we do it?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> There are a bunch of ways for the second question... using j.u.l,
> > >> using
> > >> >> IOC and injecting our own logging target to reduce dependencies and
> > >> >> make people think before logging, using aspects?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Comments? We probably should try to get to a conclusion in general..
> .
> > >> >>
> > >> >> geir
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Alexei Zakharov,
> Intel Middleware Product Division
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
