[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1121?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14804463#comment-14804463
]
Ralph Goers commented on LOG4J2-1121:
-------------------------------------
The performance impact isn't on reconfiguration but on logging itself. Any
code, including incrementing counters, checking locks, etc. will have some
impact on performance when logging. As it stands we are already trying to find
ways to make it faster, so even a few milliseconds may not be OK.
The lock would simply replace the counter. You would still call beforeLog() as
you show above, but it would obtain a read lock insead of incrementing a
counter.
I can create some branches that have variations.
> LoggerConfig performance improvement: remove waitForCompletion and associated
> fields
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-1121
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1121
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 2.3
> Reporter: Remko Popma
>
> This ticket follows up on LOG4J2-1120. Out of the three changes identified in
> LOG4J2-1120, only two could be implemented in time for the 2.4 release.
> This ticket tracks the remaining work for the third change:
> * Since {{clearAppenders()}} is only called after all appenders have been
> stopped, {{waitForCompletion()}} may no longer be necessary (unless I am
> missing something here). If so, the {{shutdownLock}}, {{shutdown}} and
> {{counter}} fields can be removed. Not incrementing the atomic counters with
> every event in the hot path should give better performance.
> LOG4J2-1120 shows benchmark results that support this.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
