BSON can be used anywhere, it's a partially compressed JSON format.

Right now, I'm using CSV for large local logs I can later process or import
in a database.

To save space, I'd like a format that is compressed but can also be
processed as is, BSON might help.

Yes, I know I can rollover and compress ;-)

Gary

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Isn't BSON only used by Mongo?
>
> On 12 January 2016 at 12:51, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> And I'm wondering if we should have a BSON layout, that would also be
>> with Jackson.
>>
>> Gayr
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Keep in mind that we use Jackson so almost all the code is the same for
>>> JSON and XML.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Robin Coe <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would be happy to test but haven't looked at the writer
>>>> implementations, so speedy would not be the effort.  But, it's a
>>>> performance issue only...maybe...so no hurry anyway.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If the reason to do this is performance, it should be proved by a
>>>>> benchmark...
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>> On Jan 12, 2016 8:28 AM, "Gary Gregory" <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe something like mdcStyle="this/that/future"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This would also apply to the XML layout?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>> On Jan 12, 2016 8:26 AM, "Mikael Ståldal" <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ah yes, that's possible. It would be nice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Ralph Goers <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If there is a flag that causes the new structure to be generated
>>>>>>>> then he would get the performance gain when it is enabled. The current
>>>>>>>> structure would be generated when the flag is not set.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jan 12, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Mikael Ståldal <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But I guess that you won't get any performance gain if we keep the
>>>>>>>> old structure besides the new one, since then both will be parsed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Robin Coe <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree that if it were changed there may be some compatibility
>>>>>>>>> issues.  But, if it's doable, then introducing a new property could 
>>>>>>>>> bridge
>>>>>>>>> the change.  Not saying it's doable, because I haven't looked, but a 
>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>> property and a deprecation warning (in docs, I expect) would allow the
>>>>>>>>> change to happen.  Very preliminary data showed me that parsing 1000 
>>>>>>>>> events
>>>>>>>>> slowed my parser from < 500 ms (w/o contextMap) to 2000 ms when each 
>>>>>>>>> event
>>>>>>>>> contained 2 contextMap entries, requiring the list of maps to be 
>>>>>>>>> converted
>>>>>>>>> to a single map.  Not sure what the time would be to parse a 
>>>>>>>>> multi-valued
>>>>>>>>> map, though, so I can't be sure of the overhead of walking the list 
>>>>>>>>> wrapper.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 6:05 AM, Mikael Ståldal <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think that the current JSONLayout format is unfortunate, and I
>>>>>>>>>> would prefer to have it as you propose. But we cannot change it now 
>>>>>>>>>> since
>>>>>>>>>> that will break backwards compatibility.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> See: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-623
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps GELFLayout would work better for you.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The point I was trying to make is that you cannot describe what
>>>>>>>>>>> you are asking for with a generic XML schema, not sure about JSON 
>>>>>>>>>>> schema,
>>>>>>>>>>> but the idea is the same. Since we use Jackson, that also means we 
>>>>>>>>>>> use the
>>>>>>>>>>> same code to emit JSON and XML.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 4, 2016 12:25 PM, "Robin Coe" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I can see that XML entities requires conforming to a schema but
>>>>>>>>>>>> isn't the writer implementation capable of wrapping the map 
>>>>>>>>>>>> entries when
>>>>>>>>>>>> required?  Seems like it's making the JSON representation more 
>>>>>>>>>>>> complex (and
>>>>>>>>>>>> less performant) at the cost of some wrapper code for the xml 
>>>>>>>>>>>> writer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Gary Gregory <
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, that is because we can define this kind of structure with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> XML/JSON schema with ease.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 4, 2016 11:55 AM, "Robin Coe" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was trying to deserialize a log event written by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JSONLayout appender, which uses Jackson.  I therefore also am 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using Jackson
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but with the MrBeanModule, which is a POJO materializer.  After 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty with Jackson throwing deserialization exceptions with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "contextMap" field, I learned that the map is actually written 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out as a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> List of Maps (i.e. List<Map<String,String>>.  I've included one 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such event
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here, with unnecessary fields shortened:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {"timeMillis":...,"thread":"...","level":"OFF","loggerName":"...","message":"...","endOfBatch":false,"loggerFqcn":"...","contextMap":[{"key":"LOGROLL","value":"com.xxx.xxx.handler.event.FailoverHandler"},{"key":"ROUTINGKEY","value":"elasticsearch-rollover"}]}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm curious why the contextMap is represented as the more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complex List of single entry Maps, as opposed to a single 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multi-valued
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Map?  So, instead of something that looks like:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {"contextMap":[{"key":"key1"},{"value":"value1"},{"key":"key2"},{"value":"value2"},...]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would expect the much simpler (and easily parseable):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     {"contextMap":{"key1":"value1","key2":"value2",...}.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this intended?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in
>>>>>>>>>> this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person),
>>>>>>>>>> you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
>>>>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
>>>>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you
>>>>>>>> may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
>>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> [image: MagineTV]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal*
>>>>>>> Senior software developer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Magine TV*
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
>>>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
>>>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you
>>>>>>> may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
>>>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by
>>>>>>> reply email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>



-- 
E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Reply via email to