TECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:24 AM
>To: Log4J Users List
>Subject: Re: log4j: dump wrap-around buffer of all log messages
>
>
>Yes, this is certainly possible. The SMTPAppender works in a similar
>fashion.
>
>At 03:09 PM 8/11/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>>
g to log4j, that's a red flag for me.
I will be glad to be convinced otherwise by a benchmark, however...
Yoav Shapira
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 3:29 PM
>> To: Log4J Users
other hand will give you very valuable feedback in case of an
exception/error.
> -Original Message-
> From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 3:29 PM
> To: Log4J Users List
> Subject: RE: log4j: dump wrap-around buffer of all log messa
Dear log4j users,
Currently I'm evaluating log4j 1.2.8 to replace an other Java Trace package
(see http://visibleworkings.com/trace/) in our applications. Log4j's big
advantage is its performance, but still I'm missing a feature that is
present in the Java Trace package: the ability to dump a wra
At 03:23 PM 8/11/2003 +0200, you wrote:
> From: Hancke Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> The wrap-around buffer (think of it as an array of let's say 500 log
> messages) contains at any moment, the last 500 log messages.
> The idea is
> that the logger has 2 log levels: one which determine
> From: Hancke Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> The wrap-around buffer (think of it as an array of let's say 500 log
> messages) contains at any moment, the last 500 log messages.
> The idea is
> that the logger has 2 log levels: one which determines what
> level is present
> in the lo
Yes, this is certainly possible. The SMTPAppender works in a similar fashion.
At 03:09 PM 8/11/2003 +0200, you wrote:
Dear log4j users,
Currently I'm evaluating log4j 1.2.8 to replace an other Java Trace package
(see http://visibleworkings.com/trace/) in our applications. Log4j's big
advantage is
