Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in dynamic application log levels

[Dongjin Lee]

Hi David,


Thanks for picking up this issue.


1. Why does this proposal regard OFF only, not ALL?


The reason is simple; As you can see, both of ALL and OFF were excluded in
KIP-412. However, ALL level is equivalent to TRACE without a custom logging
level. (please refer to this discussion
 of
the slf4j community.)


For this reason, ALL seems redundant, so this KIP proposes introducing OFF
only.


2. Is OFF level really necessary?


YES. We can turn off the loggers used for monitoring by setting the logging
level FATAL. But, if the logger is not a regularly monitored one (e.g.,
used occasionally only for debugging), there are some messages with FATAL
level (like `kafka.coordinator.transaction *ZkProducerIdManager*`), we
can't entirely turn off this logger. I am proposing that supporting the OFF
level will help manage these kinds of loggers.


Best,

Dongjin

On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 1:12 AM David Jacot 
wrote:

> Hi Dongjin,
>
> Thanks for the KIP.
>
> It is not so clear to me why we decided not to support OFF in the
> first place. I understand that entirely disabling a logger is rare.
>
> I find the KIP a bit week at the moment for two reasons:
>
> 1) The KIP says that the levels that we use are not fully
> consistent with the log4j's level. OFF and ALL miss. However,
> the KIP proposes to only introduce OFF.
>
> 2) Introducing ALL is rejected because TRACE could be used. I
> think that the same argument for OFF as FATAL could be used
> to reduce the verbosity to the minimum and as we rarely use
> FATAL in the code base that is more or less equivalent to OFF.
> This is what I usually do, personally.
>
> Honestly, I don't feel strong either way so let's see what others
> have to say.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:04 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kafka dev,
> >
> > I would like to start the discussion of KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in
> > dynamic application log levels.
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-817%3A+Fix+inconsistency+in+dynamic+application+log+levels
> >
> > This is rather a minor issue, but I found it while working with KIP-653:
> > Upgrade log4j to log4j2 (Accepted).
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2
> >
> > All kinds of feedbacks are greatly appreciated!
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > linkedin:
> kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > speakerdeck:
> speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > *
>


-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in dynamic application log levels

[David Jacot]

Hi Dongjin,

Thanks for the KIP.

It is not so clear to me why we decided not to support OFF in the
first place. I understand that entirely disabling a logger is rare.

I find the KIP a bit week at the moment for two reasons:

1) The KIP says that the levels that we use are not fully
consistent with the log4j's level. OFF and ALL miss. However,
the KIP proposes to only introduce OFF.

2) Introducing ALL is rejected because TRACE could be used. I
think that the same argument for OFF as FATAL could be used
to reduce the verbosity to the minimum and as we rarely use
FATAL in the code base that is more or less equivalent to OFF.
This is what I usually do, personally.

Honestly, I don't feel strong either way so let's see what others
have to say.

Cheers,
David




On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:04 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
>
> Hi Kafka dev,
>
> I would like to start the discussion of KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in
> dynamic application log levels.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-817%3A+Fix+inconsistency+in+dynamic+application+log+levels
>
> This is rather a minor issue, but I found it while working with KIP-653:
> Upgrade log4j to log4j2 (Accepted).
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2
>
> All kinds of feedbacks are greatly appreciated!
>
> Best,
> Dongjin
>
> --
> *Dongjin Lee*
>
> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
>
>
>
> *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> *

[DISCUSS] KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in dynamic application log levels

[Dongjin Lee]

Hi Kafka dev,

I would like to start the discussion of KIP-817: Fix inconsistency in
dynamic application log levels.

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-817%3A+Fix+inconsistency+in+dynamic+application+log+levels

This is rather a minor issue, but I found it while working with KIP-653:
Upgrade log4j to log4j2 (Accepted).

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2

All kinds of feedbacks are greatly appreciated!

Best,
Dongjin

-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*