Thanks.
I shall raise a bug in the JIRA....
On 10/25/2011 03:48 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
Actually, Logback was originally designed with the assumption that Layouts were
not thread-safe. I'm not sure if it is still the case, but at one PatternLayout
was not. If you look at AppenderBase you will see that.
UnsynchronizedAppenderBase was created for Appenders that are completely
thread-safe, including the Layouts they use.
FWIW, I agree that Layouts should always be thread-safe.
Ralph
On Oct 24, 2011, at 5:29 PM, jakartaman wrote:
Hi,
Quick remark:
It is not clear from the logback docs whether a new layout should be
threadsafe. I strongly suspect that it should be (why would logback do the
possibly unnecessary locking for you?), but - should that not be explicitly
said?
E.g. coders may fall into the usual trap of having an instance-bound or even
static SimpleDateFormat member and not making the access to it synchronized etc
(aehm).
Best regards,
--- David
_______________________________________________
Logback-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
_______________________________________________
Logback-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
_______________________________________________
Logback-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
