By the way, I am aware that these changes don't (yet) address the
opportunity for deadlock. That'll come later (hopefully).
This just *reduces* both the bottleneck and deadlock potential.
Jess Holle wrote:
I made a slight adjustment to the pre-Java-5 solution and replaced it
(unconditionally here, though this could easily be made conditional)
with a Java 5 implementation.
Jess Holle wrote:
We as many others have been bitten by the synchronization nuances of
log4j.
Attached is a proposed patch to reduce the scope of the problem. No,
this is not yet regression tested due to the issues I e-mailed about
previously with the regression test suite, but I'd like to spur some
discussion as to what's wrong with such a change, etc.
I was considering using Java 5 features here and could, but the key
issue here does not appear to require such fanciness to address.
--
Jess Holle
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
