Matt, Benjamin’s issue is that he has no control over what is running in the “jobs” but he wants all the logs for a “job” to end up in the same appender. His definition of a job is that he is creating a thread to run it and everything under that thread should route to that Appender. So he cannot control what logger names are used much less whether they have Markers or not.
Ralph > On Apr 25, 2019, at 8:59 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 18:47, Benjamin Jaton <benjamin.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I've implemented the solution based on ThreadGroups. Now I am trying to >> have a separate log level per job. The goal is to be able to set one job in >> DEBUG or TRACE while the others stay in WARN. Possible? >> The RoutingAppender creates an appender per route but as far as I know I >> cannot set a log level on the appender object. I guess filters could be >> used but is there something simpler I'm missing? > > I think you'd be better off using markers for that. See > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/markers.html > > You might also be able to just use a naming scheme for your loggers > that automatically makes them separately configurable as typical > loggers. For example, say you use a naming scheme > "com.example.threadgroup.<groupName>" as your loggers. Then you could > configure them by name as usual. > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
