If some of the logging is business critical, perhaps you should put it in a separate logging context and don't let your users reconfigure that context. Or not use Log4j at all for the business critical logging.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Nicholas Duane <nic...@msn.com> wrote: > 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 > > > > -- [image: MagineTV] *Mikael Ståldal* Senior backend developer *Magine TV* mikael.stal...@magine.com Regeringsgatan 25 | 111 53 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.
