Thanks for both answers, we did consider to use the AsyncAppender for the
syslog but ended up chosing the AsyncLogger for both the syslog and file
which should be fine
Thanks again for your inputs
Best regards
LF
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 17:24 Ralph Goers wrote:
> Actually Matt, I don’t believe th
Actually Matt, I don’t believe the routing appender will help for what he is
asking for. Sorry to be blunt but it really makes no sense.
Log events get generated by an application and are routed to the appropriate
LoggerConfig by way of a Logger. The LoggerConfig then routes them to the
appropr
You should take a look at the routing appender for supporting what you want
to do. You can certainly keep the same logger name. You’d simply route log
events based on other metadata. See:
http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/appenders.html#RoutingAppender
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 06:35 Lars-F
Hi
We have different appenders, one file appender and one syslog appender
amongst others. We want the file appender to use a normal Logger and the
syslog appender using an AsyncLogger. When the different
applications/functions perform the logging they don't know if it will end
up in the file appen
