Well, there are a couple of issues with this approach, I think(please correct me if
I'm wrong). First, there seem to be some flow-control issue; I need to deal with the
cases where the buffer is full. Secondly, I don't think it will work with several
threads accessing it at the same time?
Roger
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/08/01 03:16AM >>>
How about using the AsyncAppender in combination with the JMSAppender?
This seems to be just what it was designed for.....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Kjensrud [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Separate InitialContext
>
> Attached is my modified JMSAppender. Include the following properties in
> your properties/xml file:
>
> log4j.appender.A1=com.cj.foundation.log4j.JMSLogger
> log4j.appender.A1.TopicBindingName=testtopic
> log4j.appender.A1.TopicConnectionFactoryBindingName=TopicConnectionFactory
> log4j.appender.A1.InitialContextFactory=com.swiftmq.jndi.InitialContextFac
> toryImpl
> log4j.appender.A1.ProviderUrl=smqp://localhost:4001/timeout=10000
> log4j.appender.A1.TimeToLive=120000
>
> The performance tests I've done on the JMS logging shows it is far slower
> than writing to a file. The reason being that the appender does not return
> until the JMS server acknowledges persisting the log message(this assumes
> using persistence when publishing). The logging time for JMS ranged from
> 10ms to 50ms on a Win2k 650MHz box with SwiftMq. We're thinking of using
> JMS for logging exceptions only and using files for tracing and general
> debug. I'm currently working on a way to log to different files for
> different JVMs. This is necessary for application servers where the same
> application can be run in several JVM on the same box at the same time.
>
> Roger
>
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/05/01 12:42AM >>>
> Roger Kjensrud wrote:
> >
> > I extended the JMSAppender and included the url and the initial context
> > factory in the config and it works just fine. If there is any interest I
> can
> > post the extended JMSAppender for others to use.
> >
> > I'm using SwiftMQ, and I notice that the publishing of the LoggingEvent
> > takes quite a bit longer than for example logging to file. Does anyone
> else
> > has any experience with the performance of using the JMSAppender or
> logging
> > to JMS in general?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roger
>
> Post it Roger! I would like to see an example configuration on that. Do
> you have already made any exp with the performance of that?
>
> Regards
> Armin Rauch
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> << File: JMSLogger.java >> << File: ATT280717.txt >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
