rmannibucau commented on issue #8321:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hop/issues/8321#issuecomment-5655512539

   > @rmannibucau No, I don't want to have pipelines and workflows wait until 
the logging back-end is ready. It really needs to be synchronous or a lot is 
going to break all over the place and it won't be easy to notice.
   
   well the points were:
   
   1. it is async only when you desire (conf)
   2. async is done to evaluate at publish time some data so in general in 
pipelines with a lot of data you really want to be async and it doesn't break 
anything
   
   the overall outcome is that it works today (1) and it can be better tomorrow 
(2), this is why I asked you specific pointers if you do have them cause I fail 
to see an issue there
   
   
   > The traditional Java world simply throws log lines into some logging 
system that just has severity, a timestamp and some text. That's it and they're 
done with it. Hop really needs a lot more for things like the various logging 
options to work. We want to know exactly where something was logged, when, 
which transform, action, which parent, the whole nine yards.
   
   Hmm, this is wrong since 15 years I fear, MDC and NDC were designed to not 
be limited to that exactly.
   I'm not 100% sure of which one would be the most relevant (MDC is insanely 
simple and well supported, NDC is more powerful but harder in general to use 
and has context propagation hypothesis which might be wrong in some hop runtime 
env not sync themselves - that said it is not more broken than today on this 
aspect I think).
   
   PR uses MDC 
(https://github.com/apache/hop/pull/8320/changes#diff-ab30e59089eedc3b3c0c049da987c41c80450184eb0f732c8bb4f3e4a3b99f88R43
 for ex) for now.
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to