Re: [log4j] Annotation processing alternatives

We really don’t have much choice. With JPMS you really need to use ServiceLoader to locate things like plugins across modules. Using a s file like spring.factories doesn’t really help anyway. You wouldn’t want to force users to hand create the entries in that file and so would use annotations

Re: Migrating the landing page

rio, I use Docker. > > As an example, for the privacy website to check: > docker run --rm -p 4000:4000 --mount type=bind,src=$PWD,dst=/root/build > --mount type=volume,dst=/root/build/node_modules -it > apache/privacy_apache_org serve --watch --incremental > > There

Re: Log4j Audit

Sure Ralph > On Oct 10, 2023, at 2:05 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > > Hi all, > > Since Log4j Audit will not be archived, could someone update its > dependencies? Dependabot has lots of security alerts about it: > > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j-a

Re: [log4j] Project URLs per major version

I am ok with 1 and 2, but not 3. Doing that means older releases web sites are no longer available. Just because the latest includes release notes for all versions doesn’t mean it fully documents what was in prior releases. However, I am not surprised you are suggesting this as I posted in an

Re: Staging sites and repo convention

+1 Fix the staging site. Defer talk about anything else until that is done. Ralph > On Oct 22, 2023, at 5:05 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > >  > >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023, at 21:54, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: >> It has been a long thread and I want to capture the result: *there are no >>

Re: Considering porting DI to 2.x

Lol. Ok An app running in Java 11. That changes nothing. We can certainly make some incompatible changes but as we have previously discussed some of the things you removed will have to be reverted. Making Log4J 3 not backward compatible would be a disaster. Ralph > On Apr 18, 2022, at 5:07

Re: Consuming our own BOM

It is implemented on master. Ralph > On May 30, 2022, at 2:27 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > Mind somebody sharing the last state? Is it implemented, if so how and on > which branch(es)? Is it reverted? If so, totally or partially? > >> On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 9:53 AM Ralph Goers >> wrote: >>

Re: Maven site failure

False is the default so I left it alone. It also means it is specified in less places. Ralph > On Dec 30, 2022, at 5:26 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > Should that setting be flipped such that a Maven module ask to be Javadoc'd? > > Gary > >> On Fri, Dec 30, 2022, 07:23 Volkan Yazıcı wrote:

Re: Broken build

Consistent Ralph > On Nov 16, 2022, at 5:23 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > Is this a consistent failure or random? > >> On Nov 16, 2022, at 3:42 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> I haven’t run a build in a while and looking at the recent commits I am not >> sure what is causing this, but some

Re: [logging-log4j2] branch master updated: [LOG4J2-3459] - Add LoggingSystemProvider SPI

vider::getInstance which >>>> can be implemented using Injector in Log4j Core. The general utility class >>>> for working with this provider is available as an internal (util3) class >>>> in LoggingSystem. Test fixture helper classes have also been updated to &

Re: [logging-log4j2] branch master updated: [LOG4J2-3459] - Add LoggingSystemProvider SPI

l package and > export it to other Log4j modules. That makes sense. > > And LoggingSystem probably doesn’t need a Lazy instance of itself, right. > > — > Matt Sicker > >> On Oct 31, 2022, at 20:58, Apache wrote: >> >>  >> >> See be

Re: JDK 20 is now GA, JDK 21 Early-Access builds, and 2 important heads-up!

We need to look into this now that scoped variables are present. Ralph > On Mar 28, 2023, at 5:46 AM, David Delabassee > wrote: > > Welcome to the latest OpenJDK Quality Outreach update! > > Last week was busy as we released both Java 20 and JavaFX 20. To celebrate > the launch, we hosted

Re: [Log4j] Moving `log4j-jmx-gui` to its own repo

I would be comfortable with this if it is moved to its own repo and released first, then removed from the Log4J repo. I am not comfortable with “we can do it someday if we want to” unless we are dropping support for it. Ralph > On Mar 20, 2023, at 3:36 AM, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: > > [TLDR:

Re: Usage examples of flow messages

Yes, add the missing method. We use these methods A LOT. I suspect we are not alone. Ralph > On Feb 13, 2024, at 3:17 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > > Hi all, > > Our Logger interface contains 11 traceEntry/traceExit methods and 4 > deprecated entry/exit methods. As far as I have seen, only

Re: [log4j] Remove `` in `main`

I’ve delayed answering because I can’t make up my mind. I am still thinking about this. Ralph > On Feb 12, 2024, at 12:58 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz > wrote: > > Hi Volkan, > >> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 at 20:30, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: >> `StatusLogger` can be configured in following ways: >> >> 1.

Re: Nullability annotations

If this is a runtime dependency then I am against using it in Log4J api and core. Ralph > On Jan 2, 2024, at 3:17 AM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > > Hi all, > > Matt made an interesting proposal to use JSpecify nullability > annotations in Log4j: > > https://github.c

Re: Change semantics of `Throwable` parameters

 I agree with everything Remko said plus these extra comments. Throwing is a convenience method to standardize the output when an application will be throwing an exception. That, of course, means it isn’t a required method. I doubt it is used very much. Of course, catching is its companion but

Re: [Log4j] If and how to document potential OOME

That is kind of my point. Anyone who logs an object that behaves this way is asking for trouble. It really sounds like an esoteric edge case to me. I don’t view this as a Log4J problem as the error wouldn’t even have Log4J in the stack trace. Ralph > On Jan 25, 2024, at 9:52 PM, Gary Gregory

Re: [log4j] Unstable tests on Windows

In my experience they never get fixed. To be honest, when I was doing the releases I would have these failures investigated to determine if it was a trait problem vs a problem in the code being released. If it was the latter I would cancel the vote. The only time tests should be disabled is if

Re: [DOC] Make use of "common" logging website pages (security, downloads etc. pp)

+1 Ralph > On Apr 25, 2024, at 5:00 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > > Hi, > > By accident, I stumbled across this issue today: > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4cxx/issues/370 > > We think we should use the standard websites across all our repo

Re: End-of-life date for `log4j-1.2-api`

the artifact and include > it as it in Log4j 3.0.0? > > Piotr > > [1] https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/issues/2395

Re: 2.6 Release

creating that file. Given the slow internet at my >>>> hotel I may have to wait til next week. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>> On May 19, 2016, at 10:37 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com <>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I

Re: 2.6 Release

(...) >> >> >> If no objections I'll commit this when I get home in a few hours. >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 2016/05/25, at 15:12, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com >> <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: >

Re: Opinions or guidelines on what each logging level is for?

:30 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I have some guidelines on a wiki for work. I will forward them when I get > home. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Feb 1, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com > <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>>

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 > > [INFO] > [INFO] --- maven-failsafe-plugin:2.19.1:verify (verify) @ log4j-nosql --- > [INFO] > ---- > [INFO] Reactor Summary: > [INFO] > [INFO] Apache Log4j NoSQL .....

Re: Opinions or guidelines on what each logging level is for?

I have some guidelines on a wiki for work. I will forward them when I get home. Sent from my iPad > On Feb 1, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > I had a meeting at work recently where a small debate was brought up as to > what sorts of things to log at each logging

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

ot a problem. I seems like a normal > set up: > https://www.datastax.com/2012/01/getting-started-with-apache-cassandra-on-windows-the-easy-way > > <https://www.datastax.com/2012/01/getting-started-with-apache-cassandra-on-windows-the-easy-way> > > G > > On

Re: Logback performance improvements

j and logback. > > On 5 February 2017 at 16:06, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > You should run the code at https://github.com/ceki/logback-perf > <https://github.com/ceki/logback-perf> to compare your results to C

Re: Logback performance improvements

n FileChannel or AsynchronousFileChannel instead of > OutputStream? > > On 6 February 2017 at 17:50, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Ceki has updated his numbers to include those reported on the mailing list. > https://do

Re: Logback performance improvements

Logback 1.2-SNAPSHOT Ralph > On Feb 6, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry what 1.2 do you mean? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 7, 2017, at 11:06, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.

Re: Logback performance improvements

ok at this. > > On 7 February 2017 at 10:05, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > A FileChannel is guaranteed to be thread safe. You can obtain a FileChannel > from a FlieOutputStream, so that would seem to imply that FileOutputStre

Re: Logback performance improvements

gt; that I can't even remember the last time I had to write an actual lock. > > On 6 February 2017 at 22:02, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Logback 1.2-SNAPSHOT > > Ralph > >> On Feb 6, 2017, at 8:29 PM, Remko P

Re: Logback performance improvements

gt; the bottleneck is. > We could try whether we get better numbers if we remove the current > synchronization (ignoring any scrambled output, just for testing purposes). > > > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.

Re: Logback performance improvements

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Yes, that is still the standard approach most people use and is the only way > to provide a head-to-head comparison against the logging frameworks. > > Ralph > >> On Feb 6, 20

Re: Logback performance improvements

I tried to modify FileManager to just use a BufferedOutputStream but discovered I couldn’t as the layouts now require the ByteBuffer. Ralph > On Feb 8, 2017, at 12:14 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > The append method isn’t synchronized but the writeBytes

Re: Logback performance improvements

I’m pretty sure the problem we have is that a) we are synchronizing many methods and b) we are synchronizing more than just the write. Unfortunately, I can’t figure out how to reduce that based on how dispersed the code has gotten. Ralph > On Feb 8, 2017, at 10:14 AM, Apache <ra

Re: Java 9

n you point me at some info on that? What massive changes are needed? > > Remko > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 7, 2017, at 1:36, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > >> I fixed the only problem I could fi

Re: Logback performance improvements

4.585 ops/ms The news page at Logback says that it has major performance improvements but these numbers are 3-4 times slower than what I got with 1.1.10. Ralph > On Feb 8, 2017, at 10:31 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I’m pretty sure the prob

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

lli... >> RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem >> target\rolli... >> RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem >> target\rolli... >> RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem

Re: Logback performance improvements

her way, that's rather > interesting. > > On 6 February 2017 at 07:54, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Someone posted numbers on the Logback user’s list that match mine. It shows > Logback 1.1.9 was pretty terribl

Re: [jira] [Commented] (LOG4J2-1809) Add global configuration environment SPI

egory commented on LOG4J2-1809: > -- > > It seems we are entering Apache Commons Configuration territory here. Should > we have a bridge to it? > >> Add global configuration environment SPI >> --

Re: Logback performance improvements

o.a.l.l.p.j.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFilethrpt 20 999667.438 ± 12074.003 ops/s I’ll have to try this on one my VMs at work. We don’t run anything directly on bare metal any more. Ralph > On Feb 5, 2017, at 9:40 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > &g

Logback performance improvements

Ceki finally fixed some of the performance problems in the FileAppender. See https://logback.qos.ch/news.html and https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cpb5D7qnyye4W0RTlHUnXedYK98catNZytYIu5D91m0/edit#gid=0

Re: Java 9

I fixed the only problem I could find last week. However, we still have more to do as we really need to support the StackWalker API and the “right” way to do it would require massive changes. I also need to benchmark the cost of invoking the StackWalker API to return the method’s caller to see

Re: Logback performance improvements

<mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Is this something we can improve performance on by implementing a file > appender based on FileChannel or AsynchronousFileChannel instead of > OutputStream? > > On 6 February 2017 at 17:50, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:

Re: Logback performance improvements

/ms Iteration 10: 1142.684 ops/ms Ralph > On Feb 7, 2017, at 10:55 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > True, but I would still like to also see what difference it makes using the > FileChannel instead of the OutputStream. > > Ralph > >> On Feb

Re: Logback performance improvements

s/command line... > > Gary > > On Feb 5, 2017 11:58 AM, "Apache" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > I guess my MacBook Pro must fit in the Slow CPU/Fast Hard drive category. > With Logback 1.10 and -t 4 now ge

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

elease just the last module as version 2.8, or we could release the whole > log4j-scala repo as 2.8.1. > > On 23 January 2017 at 09:13, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Every git repo has to be released separatel

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

t; thought. Oh well, that's certainly not a blocker. :) > > On 22 January 2017 at 00:14, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > It appears that when the main page was converted to Markdown one of the > version numbers

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

magine.com > <mailto:mikael.stal...@magine.com>> wrote: > But currently some Scala modules are duplicated in main repo and Scala repo. > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > We do

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

-string data type support to JdbcAppender via new >> ColumnMapping plugin. >> o LOG4J2-1771: Add a Builder to ColumnConfig and deprecate >> ColumnConfig.createColumnConfig(). >> o LOG4J2-1770: Add a Builder to JdbcAppender and deprecate >> JdbcAppender.creat

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

OK - I don’t see that as a big deal. Ralph > On Jan 24, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Everything in the "Log4j Dependency" column are supposed to be markdown links > to subdirectories. > > On 24 January 2017 at 10:49,

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

g data type support to JdbcAppender via new >> ColumnMapping plugin. >> o LOG4J2-1771: Add a Builder to ColumnConfig and deprecate >> ColumnConfig.createColumnConfig(). >> o LOG4J2-1770: Add a Builder to JdbcAppender and deprecate >> JdbcAppender.creat

RollingAppenderSizeTest

I am looking at the failures that are occurring in the RollingAppenderSizeTest in the Jenkins build. I am working at modifying the code so that the asynchronous tasks will complete before shutdown is allowed to complete. But I am running into an issue I am not sure how to resolve. The test is

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest

be to put in a guard that would prevent a subsequent rollover from occurring until the async tasks complete. Ralph > On Jan 24, 2017, at 1:03 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I am looking at the failures that are occurring in the > RollingAppenderSizeTest in

Re: logging-log4j2 git commit: Use an ExecutorService to verify shutdown of the async threads

According to the Javadoc, the ExecutorService will first create threads up to corePoolSize. Those threads will be left active in the pool. Next, if there are more that corePoolSize but less than maximumPoolSize threads running then the request will be added to the queue. If the queue is full

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest

gt; wrote: > > A custom ExecutorService extension that only allows one task of each kind to > be executed at a time or some other classifier could be an approach possibly? > > On 24 January 2017 at 15:53, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest

ll be deleted based on the file pattern. > > When I first started using the RFA, I was surprised at the behavior for > always writing to the same file name and then copying that on rollover. > Diff'rent strokes I guess ;-) > > Gary > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at

Re: Jenkins build is still unstable: Log4j 2.x #2627

Wonderful. Ralph > On Jan 24, 2017, at 4:38 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > There seems to be a problem with the custom Delete action in > RollingFileAppender now. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jan 25, 2017, at 8:32, Apache Jenkins

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

24, 2017, at 6:29 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Reviewing src zip. MD5, ASC OK. > > Reviewing with BUILDING.md. > > With: > > Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; > 2015-11-10T08:41:47-08:00) > Maven home: C

[VOTE][RESULT] Log4j 2.8 rc1

This vote has passed with binding +1 votes from Mikael Ståldal, Ralph Goers, Remko Popma, and Matt Sicker. Thanks to all who voted. I will continue on with the release process. Ralph - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

t 5:29 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com > <mailto:garydgreg...@gmail.com>> wrote: > Reviewing src zip. MD5, ASC OK. > > Reviewing with BUILDING.md. > > With: > > Apache Maven 3.3.9 (bb52d8502b132ec0a5a3f4c09453c07478323dc5; > 2015-11-10T08:41:

Re: Use of the manual change log

I wouldn’t call making GelfLayout independent of Jackson a new feature since it wouldn’t affect the external behavior other than the dependencies. I would have marked it as a change. I would have done the same with all the “Avoid allocating temporary objects” issues. The way I look at it, is if

Re: Use of the manual change log

I would reuse the same Jira issue and modify the changes entry to indicate that both were tested. Ralph > On Jan 27, 2017, at 11:54 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I like the multiple entries because it shows that we've (presumably, which I > did with a full build)

Re: FileAppenderBenchmark

Since the change isn’t required and it is breaking log4j-perf can you please revert it? Ralph > On Jan 30, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > OK. But according to Matt this change wasn’t required. What was breaking that > needed fixing? >

Re: FileAppenderBenchmark

OK. But according to Matt this change wasn’t required. What was breaking that needed fixing? Ralph > On Jan 30, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 30, 2017 12:28 AM, "Apache" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <m

Re: FileAppenderBenchmark

> Yes. > > Ralph > > On Jan 28, 2017, at 11:59 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com > <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> Ralph, are your benchmark results with 4 threads (-t 4)? >> >> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Apache <

Fwd: [2/2] logging-log4j2 git commit: Use https URLs in pom

https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 > ~ > ~ Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software > ~ distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ > 9 > > Apache Log4j 2 > - http://logging.apac

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

data type support to JdbcAppender via new > ColumnMapping plugin. > o LOG4J2-1771: Add a Builder to ColumnConfig and deprecate > ColumnConfig.createColumnConfig(). > o LOG4J2-1770: Add a Builder to JdbcAppender and deprecate > JdbcAppender.createAppender(). > o LOG4J2-176

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest

RollingSizeTest now seems to be working properly. Ralph > On Jan 24, 2017, at 6:51 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Actually, in looking at the code I see that there is already a semaphore > there. It is just being improperly released by the rollover

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest

Actually, in looking at the code I see that there is already a semaphore there. It is just being improperly released by the rollover method. Ralph > On Jan 24, 2017, at 6:31 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > I thought of that but it doesn’t help. The renames

Re: FileAppenderBenchmark

I can no longer get the benchmarks to work. I get java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Benchmark does not match a class at org.openjdk.jmh.util.ClassUtils.loadClass(ClassUtils.java:90) at org.openjdk.jmh.runner.BaseRunner.runBenchmark(BaseRunner.java:198) at

Re: FileAppenderBenchmark

for log4j 1, 2042 for Log4j 2, 4007 for Log4j 2 RAF, and 232 for Logback. I think he must have somehow lost a digit for log4j as that would correlate with the numbers he reported. My machine has 4 cores (8 hyper threads) and is using an SSD. Ralph > On Jan 29, 2017, at 12:39 AM, Apache <ra

Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1

I don’t have the numbers but I have a couple of issues that need fixes. The modules stuff doesn’t require a major version bump. It is mostly cosmetic. Ralph > On Feb 24, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > > I think we can do 2.8.1 with our current bug fixes.

Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1

s in svn for a site update, could this be > more annoying to maintain? > > On 24 February 2017 at 22:30, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > From my perspective that doesn’t matter. However, we would really need a > Scala site b

Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1

; On 24 February 2017 at 14:17, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > I don’t have the numbers but I have a couple of issues that need fixes. > > The modules stuff doesn’t require a major version bump. It is mostly cosmetic. >

Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1

Note that the link in the log4j site can reference a symlink so that the log4j site never has to change when the Scala site is updated. Ralph > On Feb 24, 2017, at 11:21 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Option 2 makes no sense to me. I don’t plan on being the

Re: Roadmap for 2.8.1

to commit the scala site where it is now, but you'd have to > manage it alongside log4j core releases. Option 1 still requires maintenance, > too. > > On 25 February 2017 at 00:05, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > There

Re: Patch submitted for LOG4J2-1804

Thanks for pinging us. I’ve assigned the issue to me so I remember to look at it when I get a chance. Ralph > On Feb 21, 2017, at 8:13 AM, Pierrick HYMBERT > wrote: > > Hello Team, > > I have submitted a patch several days ago on an opened jira I have found on >

Re: Logback performance improvements

ps/ms" > "ch.qos.logback.perf.FileAppenderBenchmark.log4j2RAF","thrpt",16,10,1266.241778,7.564414,"ops/ms" > "ch.qos.logback.perf.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFile","thrpt",16,10,789.507183,9.866592,"ops/ms" > "Benchmark","Mode","Threads","Sa

Re: Logback performance improvements

,16,10,1266.241778,7.564414,"ops/ms" > "ch.qos.logback.perf.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFile","thrpt",16,10,789.507183,9.866592,"ops/ms" > "Benchmark","Mode","Threads","Samples","Score","Score E

Re: Logback performance improvements

,10,1266.241778,7.564414,"ops/ms" > "ch.qos.logback.perf.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFile","thrpt",16,10,789.507183,9.866592,"ops/ms" > "Benchmark","Mode","Threads","Samples","Score","Score Error (99.9%

Re: Logback performance improvements

t; That value does look messed up. I'll re-run the 32 thread tests. Also, I'm > not on the logback lists yet, so I'll sign up this afternoon. > > On 9 February 2017 at 14:35, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > What is

Re: Logback performance improvements

nchmark results will misinterpret them and > get confused. > > The existing Async benchmarks ensure they measure the "queue space available" > state. > > Remko > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 12, 2017, at 4:37, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextrem

Re: Remko travel plans

Safe travels. I hop you enjoy your time there. Ralph > On Feb 12, 2017, at 7:30 AM, Remko Popma wrote: > > I will be travelling to Holland between Feb 15 and March 5th, with sporadic > internet access at times, so I may be slow to reply during this period. > > Remko

Re: Regarding Checkstyle, PMD, and formatting

uary 2017 at 09:36, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com > <mailto:remko.po...@gmail.com>> wrote: > +1 on braces > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > You don’t really have

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

tion-instrumenter\java-allocation-instrumenter\3.0.1\java-allocation-instrumenter-3.0.1.jar]> Ralph > On Feb 13, 2017, at 12:13 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > No. I plan to figure out why it is breaking. > > Ralph > >> On Feb 13, 2017, at 11

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

ishing normally on test > completion? Could this be the same kind of issue? > > Gary > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > I got a Windows 10 VM installed and was able to r

Re: RollingAppenderSizeTest failures

RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem > target\rolli... > RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem > target\rolli... > RollingAppenderSizeTest.cleanup:115->cleanFolder:189 ╗ FileSystem > target\rolli... > Rol

Re: Logback performance improvements

It is there now. Ralph > On Feb 9, 2017, at 7:46 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > can you push the correct config? > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote:

Re: Logback performance improvements

it though. Ralph > On Feb 9, 2017, at 7:03 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > After modifying the configuration the new results on my laptop are: > > Benchmark Mode Samples Score

Re: Logback performance improvements

10 1765.340 ± 149.707 ops/ms o.a.l.l.p.j.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFilethrpt 10 1192.594 ± 57.777 ops/ms I will try the other machines later and post those results. Ralph > On Feb 9, 2017, at 5:22 AM, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Ceki rep

Re: Logback performance improvements

d but I > haven't measured this myself. > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 2:31, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >> >> I’m pretty sure the problem we have is that a) we are synchronizing many >> methods and b) we are synchroni

Re: [VOTE] Release Log4j 2.8-rc1

a Builder to JdbcAppender and deprecate > JdbcAppender.createAppender(). > o LOG4J2-1764: Use MethodHandle in ContextDataFactory cached constructor. > o LOG4J2-1730: Add Apache Cassandra appender and ColumnMapping plugin. > o LOG4J2-1759: Add TypeConverter for java.util.UUID. >

Re: Regarding Checkstyle, PMD, and formatting

You don’t really have to use final everywhere. If you don’t, Gary will fix it ;-) Actually, I really do prefer most of our check style rules, but not enough to yell and scream about it. The one that bothers me the most is that I want braces wherever they are optional. Ralph > On Feb 10,

Re: Logback performance improvements

.205 ops/ms > o.a.l.l.p.j.FileAppenderBenchmark.log4j2RAF thrpt 20 823.059 ± > 41.512 ops/ms > o.a.l.l.p.j.FileAppenderBenchmark.logbackFilethrpt 2083.352 ± > 11.911 ops/ms > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Mikael Ståldal <mik

Re: github

of svn and who do not have commit rights to our project. > > There is an issue with Apache and GitHub where if I look at my Travis CI page > -- which I connected to my GitHub account -- I do not see myself in Travis > CI's site, as a member of the Apache organization on GitHub. After

Re: ThreadContextMap3

t;> >> On Jan 17, 2017, at 6:25, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com >> <mailto:boa...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>> I agree on not extending interfaces. Some of the other context map >>> interfaces are standalone, and I don't see why TCM2 had to extend anything. >

github

I am finding myself a bit frustrated with out GitHub repo. What exactly are we supposed to be able to do? My understanding is that we can’t actually do merges there as it is a mirror of the ASF git repo. I seem to be able to only comment on pull requests but can’t actually add myself as a

Re: Remaining tasks for a 2.8 release

How do I add myself as a reviewer? Ralph > On Jan 17, 2017, at 2:05 PM, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com> wrote: > > OK, Pull Request here: > > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/55 > <https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/55> >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >