Ceki, > In early 2002, a user (I can't find the name since Bugzilla is down) > filed a bug report claiming that on a heavily used server machine > adding buffered IO to FileAppender gave a perceptible boost to logging > performance. As a response we added buffered IO to FileAppender.
Are you talking about a bug specific to FileAppender? I remember a performance bug that was related to using buffer io with socket appenders. In this case, I did not get a chance to concretely quantify it, but I did see better performance if buffered io was used on the receiving end of the socket connection. More logging events got pushed through the pipe. I can try to put together a test. -Mark -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
