Re: [log4j 1.x] Batch-sending with SMTPAppender

2016-11-16 Thread Scott Harrington
On 11/16/16 9:49 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: First, I have to say that Log4j 1 reached end-of-life over a year ago. We recommend you upgrade to Log4j 2. Fair enough. I'm not quite there, yet. I suspect that log4j 2 will have the same issue, though. I don’t know how to configure a

Re: Make LogEvent implementations Externalizable

2014-07-28 Thread Scott Harrington
Hessian, Protobuf, Thrift, etc. Of course, that would also require the LogEventBridge to have support as well. Ralph On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:14 AM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com wrote: OK! Agree. So the 2.1 enhancement request will be for a CompactBinaryLayout on the sending side

Re: Make LogEvent implementations Externalizable

2014-07-11 Thread Scott Harrington
LogEvent fields) to the byte array in the {{toByteArray(LogEvent)}} method of an ExternalizableLayout? (Just to clarify, I intended this question literally as it could easily be that I overlooked something...) On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com wrote: I

Re: Make LogEvent implementations Externalizable

2014-07-11 Thread Scott Harrington
to it. Current 'Serializable' form is a bit chatty but is easier (automatic) to maintain. Forget I ever said anything about Externalizable. On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Remko Popma wrote: Yes that is what I had in mind. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Scott Harrington scott...@sns-usa.com wrote

Make LogEvent implementations Externalizable

2014-07-10 Thread Scott Harrington
Ralph co: I hear you're gearing up for the release. Last weekend I scratched an itch of mine relating to SocketAppender - SocketServer bandwidth, and was able to reduce a 500-character message from around 1700 bytes to 700 bytes on the wire (it's easy to improve on Java's default