How would we use this component? Would it be a full replacement for the standard
distribution, or an adder jar? I imagine a full replacement, but one must not
assume...:-) I would expect it to be the same version as the standard release with
the one file difference.
Awareness and Convenience
> -Original Message-
> From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 11:03 AM
> To: Log4J Users List
> Subject: RE: Plans for supporting a build in level of "trace"
>
>
>
> Howdy,
>
> >I agree that this debate will carry on forever, because we all wo
> -Original Message-
> From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 10:59 AM
> To: Log4J Users List
> Subject: RE: Plans for supporting a build in level of "trace"
>
>
>
> Howdy,
>
> >To separate concerns. Because trace info is a specific level, mo
It would be for jboss folks...they use a custom trace level.
I've already created a custom level (although it's probably not perfect)
for providing support for jdk1.4 util.logging-generated events (and
their levels) in Chainsaw v2. See
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-log4j/src/java/org/apac
Hypothetically speaking, let's say there was a log4j sandbox jar with a
Level class replacement that includes a TRACE level, would that be useful
for people?
---> Should do.. as long as the sandbox stays compatible with future
versions of log4J.
Shuchi
Hi,
I am trying to use the FallBackErrorHandler but cannot seem to get it to work. Here is
my log4j-config.xml file:
Howdy,
>It does not really matter what TRACE level gets used for. Each
development
>team / organization will have their interpretation of it depending on
how
>they intend to use the information logged at both levels.
I agree, it doesn't matter what it's used for, only if it's used at all.
>More
It does not really matter what TRACE level gets used for. Each development
team / organization will have their interpretation of it depending on how
they intend to use the information logged at both levels.
More importantly - having a level more verbose than DEBUG is very handy. We
are planni
Howdy,
>I agree that this debate will carry on forever, because we all work
>differently. I believe having one trace level is good compromise. The
>way I work is to put debug statements into the code to decipher what is
>happening in the program flow, but I would love to have a trace level
to
>
Hi,
I agree that this debate will carry on forever, because we all work
differently. I believe having one trace level is good compromise. The
way I work is to put debug statements into the code to decipher what is
happening in the program flow, but I would love to have a trace level to
print out
Howdy,
>To separate concerns. Because trace info is a specific level, more
minutia
>than debug info.
That's your use-case, not mine. Both are debug for me. I never want
one without the other. theValue=... is useless if I don't know what
method it's in.
>Having TRACE in Log4j means:
>1) No
This topic is a source of endless debate where I work.
We have groups that actually separate "event logging" from "tracing", and
support about 5 levels of each. So, instead of just 1 trace level, they use
5 different levels of tracing.
I doubt the end of this debate will ever be reached with c
Hi Yoav,
To separate concerns. Because trace info is a specific level, more minutia than debug
info.
For example:
private SomeClass someMethod(String anArg)
{
LOG.trace("begin");
SomeClass theValue = null;
//do some processing and get theValue
//possibly some other LOG.debug(
Howdy,
>"TRACE" or "FINE" is one that many seem to agree is sensible and
required.
That's the part I'm not convinced of. How do you support the above?
>I think the idea is, no matter how many or few default levels there
are,
>the defaults should cover the range of the "logging space" completel
Better question:
Why have any level's implemented?
Probably because it's useful to have sensible default implementations.
"TRACE" or "FINE" is one that many seem to agree is sensible and required.
I think the idea is, no matter how many or few default levels there are,
the defaults should cover
Kevin,
I am not sure I understand what you are trying to do. There is no reason to create
all loggers at startup. They will automatically be created and cached by the
Hierarchy (the default LoggerRepository) when they are first used. You do not need
your own Logger Factory for that. I am us
Howdy,
Why?
Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics
>-Original Message-
>From: Jensen, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 10:45 AM
>To: Log4J Users List
>Subject: RE: Plans for supporting a build in level of "trace"
>
>I also have wanted a TRACE level suppo
I also have wanted a TRACE level supported in Log4j for quite awhile. I hope it is
added soon...
-Original Message-
From: Dennis Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 8:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Plans for supporting a build in level of "trace"
I
Hi,
I want to add some more columns and want to log the Date and Time, so how
can I customize the HTMLLayout, or are there any properties that I can
configure in the property files to do that.
Thanks
Siddharth Jain
GTS Web Services
Merrill Lynch - Satyam ADC
Satyam Technology Centre
---
Log4j gurus,
Does log4j have support for MDC/NDC across other contexts than threads? If
not, is it any plans to implement this? For the time being I find my self
having to prefix log messages with context sensitive information, and it
doesn't really "feel" right at all.
Any suggestions for a MDC/
20 matches
Mail list logo
