Michiel,
What kind of testing are you doing? What do you mean by logging gets faster? With
respect to what? Cheers, Ceki
At 10:59 12.02.2001 +0100, you wrote:
>I did a little research if using the AsyncAppender would make
>sense. So, I made a little program with delays in it etc, as is
>suggested in the Logging javadoc of log4j. I do find no improvements
>tough in the performance, when using AsyncAppender. The thing is,
>that even without AsyncAppender logging gets faster.
>
>So, before that I'm going to do everything all over again, to check
>the results, I have a question.
>
>I'm using linux. Could that have anything to do with it? I think I've
>heard that linux buffers in- and output by itself? If that it true,
>the whole AsyncAppender in linux (and other Unixes?) would be rather
>senseless, isn't it?
>
>greetings,
>
> Michiel
>
>--
>Michiel Meeuwissen - NOS internet
>Mediacentrum kamer 203 - tel. +31 (0)35 6773065
>http://www.mmbase.org
>http://www.purl.org/NET/mihxil/
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
Ceki Gülcü e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (preferred)
av. de Rumine 5 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CH-1005 Lausanne
Switzerland Tel: ++41 21 351 23 15
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
