I am glad I asked these questions. In my opinion, you cannot protect people from messing up your configuration by providing them with some configuration, for the simple reason that they can modify your changes.
I am also with Ralph in that I am not a fan of a minimum log level that would ignore what the user configured. That is just confusing. If you really want to take away the option for your users to modify the logging configuration, your only option may be to programmatically configure Log4j. There is work in progress <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-952> for this. Of course the knife cuts both ways: this also means that if you need to support them, you cannot ask them to increase the log level to TRACE to help you diagnose the issue... My advice would be to trust that your users are smart enough not to mess it up. :-) On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:44 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote: > > > No, I don't know what "monitorInterval" is. > > > Please see > > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/configuration.html#AutomaticReconfiguration > > Gary > > > > Right now in log4net, which is where I'm redefining OFF, we have the > > log4net configuration in the application configuration file. So it for > > instance it's a web application, touching the log4net configuration will > > restart the application domain. > > > > Thanks, > > Nick > > > > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:32:15 -0700 > > > Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Maybe what I'm trying to do is not that useful. However, I'm > guessing > > the > > > > person mucking around with things would probably feel uncomfortable > > > > deleting entries in the config. If they are familiar with log4j they > > might > > > > feel comfortable setting the level if they think they should be > turning > > > > things off. > > > > > > > > > > Does this mean you use Log4j with the "monitorInterval" Confuguration > > > attribute? Or can this user also restart the application by hand for > the > > > new logging configuration to take effect? > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > > Basically, we have what we'll call "always on" or "24x7" logging. > > This is > > > > about always having INFO and more critical turned on. I'm just > > looking for > > > > ways to help enforce that. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:24:07 -0700 > > > > > Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > From: garydgreg...@gmail.com > > > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the main use case we're trying to solve is someone, maybe > > some > > > > > > admin or maybe a developer asking the admin, thinking they should > > turn > > > > > > logging off and thus sets the level to "OFF". We always want > INFO > > and > > > > more > > > > > > critical levels to be on no matter what. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if a user gets in a config file and sets the root level to off, > > how > > > > can > > > > > you stop him or her from removing your filters and custom levels? > > > > > > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > From: x...@dds.nl > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 17:55:23 +0200 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it is still unclear what you mean by "below". Normally > I > > > > would > > > > > > > consider "trace" to be at the low end and "fatal" to be at the > > high > > > > end, > > > > > > > but I don't think there is a low and high in Log4J. When you > say > > > > "below" > > > > > > > I take it you mean DEBUG and TRACE, but the only thing that > makes > > > > sense > > > > > > > to me is to keep INFO, ERROR and FATAL on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, Bart. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Op 26-8-2015 om 3:46 schreef Nicholas Duane: > > > > > > > > Yes and no. The user might know how to turn on/off logging, > > but > > > > they > > > > > > might not understand what the enterprise is wanting to do. We > > would > > > > like > > > > > > to make it hard, if not impossible, to turn off logging of INFO > and > > > > below > > > > > > (or above for .NET) events. So even if something thinks they > > should > > > > turn > > > > > > off logging and sets the level to "OFF" we still want INFO and > > below > > > > to be > > > > > > logged. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >> From: remko.po...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:25:09 +0900 > > > > > > > >> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Could you explain a bit more about your use case before we > > zoom > > > > in on > > > > > > a specific solution? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I'd like to understand better what you mean by [if someone > > sets > > > > the > > > > > > level to "OFF"]? > > > > > > > >> What is the scenario? Someone logs into the server and > > modifies > > > > the > > > > > > configuration and makes a mistake? Or is this a client > distributed > > to > > > > your > > > > > > users' PCs and they may modify the configuration? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> It sounds like you are trying to protect against human > error; > > is > > > > that > > > > > > the case? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> On 2015/08/26, at 8:37, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> No. Redefining existing levels is to help ensure we have > > "24x7" > > > > > > logging always on. So even if someone sets the level to "OFF" we > > > > still get > > > > > > INFO and above. Basically we'll have levels higher (or lower > > based on > > > > what > > > > > > platform we're talking about) than INFO OFF by default and only > > turn > > > > them > > > > > > on when needed. > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>> Nick > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 08:33:34 +0900 > > > > > > > >>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >>>> From: remko.po...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> Is redefining levels a way to work around the issue you > had > > with > > > > > > the range > > > > > > > >>>> check? > > > > > > > >>>> I've replied to your range check question with a link to > an > > > > example > > > > > > config. > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Gary Gregory < > > > > > > garydgreg...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> Well, let's all work together to get you up and running. > > > > Hopefully > > > > > > we'll > > > > > > > >>>>> get other devs to keep chiming in. > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> Gary > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Nicholas Duane < > > > > nic...@msn.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I will get to that. However, I assume that works as > > that's > > > > > > documented > > > > > > > >>>>>> pretty well. So I'm looking at the other things which > > may or > > > > may > > > > > > not > > > > > > > >>>>> work > > > > > > > >>>>>> as I have to find out what blocking issues we're going > to > > run > > > > > > into. > > > > > > > >>>>>> Redefining existing levels is one. I sent the other > email > > > > > > regarding > > > > > > > >>>>> range > > > > > > > >>>>>> level filter as we also need that to work. It works in > > > > .NET. So > > > > > > far > > > > > > > >>>>> it's > > > > > > > >>>>>> looking like I'll need to write my own filter for log4j2 > > in > > > > order > > > > > > to get > > > > > > > >>>>>> range level filtering working. > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>>>>> Nick > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:54:08 -0700 > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Ah, well, let's start with the documented stuff we know > > > > should > > > > > > work ;-) > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Gary > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Nicholas Duane < > > > > nic...@msn.com> > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks. I assumed my 'BUSINESS' level is working > using > > the > > > > > > > >>>>>> <CustomLevel>, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> though I haven't tried it yet as I was trying to > > validate > > > > > > redefining > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> existing level. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Nick > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:32:01 -0700 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Nick, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Your BUSINESS level should be configurable per > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/customloglevels.html#DefiningLevelsInConfiguration > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> I can't look into the rest ATM. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Gary > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Nicholas Duane < > > > > > > nic...@msn.com> > > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I guess I should have mentioned, though it's > probably > > > > obvious, > > > > > > > >>>>>> that I'm > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> only interested in a configuration based solution. > > I'm > > > > not > > > > > > > >>>>> looking > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> for a > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> code solution. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nick > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> From: nic...@msn.com > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:05:47 -0400 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the reply. I've seen that documentation > > and it > > > > > > > >>>>> appears > > > > > > > >>>>>> to > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> be > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> geared toward defining (NEW) custom levels. It > > doesn't > > > > > > mention > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> anything > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> about redefining existing log4j2 levels. I also > > tried it > > > > and > > > > > > so > > > > > > > >>>>>> far > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> in my > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> testing it doesn't seem to work. Below is a snippet > > of my > > > > > > > >>>>>> config. By > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> the > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> way, you'll see that I am currently trying the > > > > <CustomLevel> > > > > > > and > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> <level>. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> At first I had just tried <CustomLevel> but it > didn't > > > > appear > > > > > > to > > > > > > > >>>>>> work > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> so I > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> thought I would put the same elements I have in my > > .NET > > > > config > > > > > > > >>>>>> which > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> work. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately it still doesn't work. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <name value="OFF"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <value value="500"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> </level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <CustomLevels> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <CustomLevel name="OFF" intLevel="500"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> </CustomLevels> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <Loggers> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <Logger name="HelloWorld" level="OFF"> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <AppenderRef ref="debug"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> </Logger> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> <Root> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> </Root> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> </Loggers> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I then set my logger level to "OFF" and didn't see > any > > > > debug > > > > > > > >>>>> events > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> show > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> up. If I set the level to "DEBUG" they show up in > the > > > > log. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > >>>>>> docs > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> say > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> that DEBUG is set to 500, so me setting OFF to 500 > and > > > > then > > > > > > > >>>>>> setting the > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> level on my logger to OFF should have allowed the > > debug > > > > > > events to > > > > > > > >>>>>> flow > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> the log file, correct? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nick > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 12:50:32 -0700 > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: redefining existing levels? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> From: garydgreg...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> To: log4j-user@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Nicholas, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, please see > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/customloglevels.html > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> If the documentation can be improved, please let us > > know > > > > how. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gary > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Nicholas Duane < > > > > > > > >>>>> nic...@msn.com > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Can existing log4j2 levels be redefined? I'm able > > to do > > > > > > this > > > > > > > >>>>>> in > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> log4net. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I have yet to see any documentation telling me > that > > I > > > > can do > > > > > > > >>>>>> it, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> however, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> there was none telling me I could do it for .NET > > > > either. I > > > > > > > >>>>>> just > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> happen to > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> stumble upon a post which eluded to it. Here is > > what > > > > I've > > > > > > > >>>>>> done in > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> log4net config file: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <configuration> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <log4net> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <name value="Off"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <value value="40000"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <name value="Business"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <value value="130000"/> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <level> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> </log4net> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> . > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> </configuration> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> As you can see I created my own 'Business' > level. I > > > > also > > > > > > > >>>>>> redefined > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Off to > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 40000 which happens to be the INFO level. This > > makes it > > > > > > such > > > > > > > >>>>>> that > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> if > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> they > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> set the level to Off they will still receive INFO > > and > > > > higher > > > > > > > >>>>>> level > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> events. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Can the same thing be done in log4j2? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nick > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | > ggreg...@apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> 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: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> 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: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>> 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: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>> 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 > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > log4j-user-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > log4j-user-h...@logging.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > > > > 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: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > > > 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: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org > 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 >
