Message -
> From: "Jason Dillon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 6:40 PM
> Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Jaws debug mode
>
>
> > > What do you think about of standardjoss.xml, should we
> remove
ginal Message -
From: "Jason Dillon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 6:40 PM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Jaws debug mode
> > What do you think about of standardjoss.xml, should we
remove
> > this too ?
>
> Probab
From
http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j/docs/manual.html
(Under the Perfomance Heading, point 2)
QUOTE
There has been a serious effort to make this hierarchy walk to be as fast as possible.
END QUOTE
You can apparently speed the walk up further, by choosing the
categories carefully, you should p
Hi,
> Does anyone know what the cost of the isXXXEnabled() methods are?
> Should we
> define booleans after Category creation, that can cache these values to
> improve speed, or just keep calling isXXXEnabled() each time?
>From the log4j sources:
public
boolean isDebugEnabled() {
if(hi
> What do you think about of standardjoss.xml, should we remove
> this too ?
Probably.
Does anyone know what the cost of the isXXXEnabled() methods are? Should we
define booleans after Category creation, that can cache these values to
improve speed, or just keep calling isXXXEnabled() each tim
On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Scott M Stark wrote:
> Yes, I am going to nuke the legacy logging interface. Are you suggesting that
> org.jboss.logging.Logger be the log4j custom category implementation instead of
> org.jboss.logging.log4j.JBossCategory?
Exactly.
--jason
: Thursday, August 09, 2001 11:25
PM
Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Jaws debug
mode
Scott, what are your toughts on dropping the old Log and Logger
classes andreplacing them with log4j, perhaps re-writing Logger to be the
JBossCategoryand using it *everywhere* instead of Category
I just modified the old JAWS JDBCCommand stuff to log4j today. I wish I did
not have to spend the time to do it either. If you find something that is
not log4j and you can make it log4j (with out much work) then do it. I can
not see any reason not to. The old logging system does not provide en
Vincent Harcq wrote:
> Hi,
> I modify JDBCCommand & co to use log4j for debugging.
>
> Should I commit that ?
Please. was this in the mainline, or the 2.4 branch? If mainline, the
old JAWS stuff or the new ejb2.0 CMP stuff?
>
> I also get rid of debug option of standardjaws.xml to use log4j
Hi,
I modify JDBCCommand & co to use log4j for debugging.
Should I commit that ?
I also get rid of debug option of standardjaws.xml to use log4j declaration
instead.
It permits better control on which class to debug (find,update,...)
Should I commit that ?
My concern is regarding performance ch
10 matches
Mail list logo
