Most of our configuration would be rudimentary, from doing a sampling of
the various config files I can just see many many instances of customized
levels for loggers with quite simplistic file appenders / rolling appenders
/ Console appender.
What I really want to do is utilize the LMAX Disruptor
From the get-go Log4j implemented a new plugin system to make it easier for
users to add their own components. In addition, new components such as global
filters and markers were added. Finally, since the internal architecture
changed none of the existing Log4j 1.x appenders or layouts could be
Was there a discussion at the outset of 2.X as to abandon support for the
pre-existing ( if laboriously heavy ) configuration files as they stood ?
A cost / benefit analysis ? It was obviously considered a blocking point to
design backwards compatibility modules for the re-factored codeline moving
Nobody ever said XSLT is simple ;)
But the standard appenders and whatnot could probably be migrated to the
equivalent appenders in 2.x.
On 7 March 2016 at 10:04, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I suspect it isn’t quite as simple as that. Many of the appenders use
> different parameters, class names aren’
Ditto. Ralph is right. It's not really about the format but the different
classes and options.
Cheers,
Paul
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> I suspect it isn’t quite as simple as that. Many of the appenders use
> different parameters, class names aren’t specified any more,
I suspect it isn’t quite as simple as that. Many of the appenders use different
parameters, class names aren’t specified any more, and the way parameters are
specified is different.
Ralph
> On Mar 7, 2016, at 8:52 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> There is no current support for the previous format,
I would more than likely be forced to utilize a parser rather than an XSLT
to transform their pre-existing files.
Thanks for the info though. It'll be helpful when bringing the case for
upgrade. Its a pretty dramatic modification to our codeline if done, 100's
of poms owned by 10's of dev-teams /
There is no current support for the previous format, but the docs do give
examples on how to convert to the new format:
http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/migration.html
Patches are always welcome to add support for the old config format, but
it's non-trivial. The new formats are very sim
Hi Log4j Usergroup,
I have a question regarding support for the previous 1.x configuration
files.
I wish to upgrade the version of Log4j across my companies platform,
however when we deploy our software we expose public logger xml files for
our clients to customize as they wish, this means that i
