hey are
> first frustrated and then they may throw the framework over board or ask
> silly questions. The latter happens about once every month. It is not nice
> to have the answer ready “this is not supported and it won’t ever be”
> because then discussions start about the why-not and ma
efault to "delete file"
Cheers
Von: d_k [mailto:mail...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 25. August 2013 18:41
An: Log4NET Dev
Betreff: Re: Ideas for a new RollingFileAppender
Hard tasks are fun, but I wouldn't want the next version to be stuck forever
because of it.
What if we m
’t they? J
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers
>
> ** **
>
> *Von:* d_k [mailto:mail...@gmail.com]
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 20. August 2013 21:16
> *An:* Log4NET Dev
> *Betreff:* Re: Ideas for a new RollingFileAppender
>
> ** **
>
> Will it be reasonable to say tha
s solve an issue but this time it is
not. Of course this is not an easy task, but easy tasks are annoying anyway.
Hard tasks make the life tasty, don't they? :)
Cheers
Von: d_k [mailto:mail...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. August 2013 21:16
An: Log4NET Dev
Betreff: Re: Ideas for
Will it be reasonable to say that as long as the target folder path is
static log4net will clean up old files and if the target folder path is
dynamic it will clean them as long as the process is up?
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2013-08-14, Dominik Psenner wrote:
On 2013-08-14, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> 2013/8/14 Stefan Bodewig
>>> The application runs for 3 days and thus log4net rolls the logfile 3
>>> times.
>> Well, I live in a world where all log files of an application are kept
>> inside the same folder :-)
> For me too, but I've seen enough to kno
2013/8/14 Stefan Bodewig
> > The application runs for 3 days and thus log4net rolls the logfile 3
> > times.
>
> Well, I live in a world where all log files of an application are kept
> inside the same folder :-)
>
For me too, but I've seen enough to know better.
> More seriously, to me it so
>> You've looked into this far more than I have but do your really feel the
>> persistent storage is needed? To me scenarios like "I have manually
>> deleted some log files" or "I have reconfigured the rolling conditions"
>> don't really have to be supported by our rolling logic. If people
>> in
> Making the appender async is a major change and it has ramifications that
> might prove problematic like unflushed buffers.
> And if we make the buffer of size 1 then its really synchronous again,
> isn't it?
>
Yes. What's the point? A file appender has to be async if it wants to be
fast. See:
Inlines again and sorry for the previous empty message. I hit the send
button before I actually wrote something. ;-)
2013/8/13 d_k
> Inlined.
>
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
>> [just changing the subject :-)]
>>
>> On 2013-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>>
>> > Anot
> Another issue that I just remembered now is that currently there's no way
to
> roll empty files on date/time boundaries. Rolling only happens when a log
> event is generated. If there's no log event, files won't be rolled. Thus
we
> should investigate if we should implement the appender as a buf
See the inlines.. I've stripped whatever's no longer interesting.
>> Another issue that I just remembered now is that currently there's no
>> way to roll empty files on date/time boundaries. Rolling only happens
>> when a log event is generated. If there's no log event, files won't be
>> rolled. T
On 2013-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> The log filename should be determined dynamically to allow users including
> information like %date, %time in the filename. It has often been requested
> and up to now it is supported only marginally.
+1
> Another issue that I just remembered now is that c
On 2013-08-13, d_k wrote:
> Whats wrong with rolling on logging events?
For one we have JIRA issues that say something is wrong :-)
OK, as long as your application logs frequently, there is no problem.
But if you have a policy that rolls on date boundaries and your
application tends to be idle a
Inlined.
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> [just changing the subject :-)]
>
> On 2013-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote:
>
> > Another issue that I just remembered now is that currently there's no
> way to
> > roll empty files on date/time boundaries. Rolling only happens whe
[good idea :-D]
>-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
>Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bode...@apache.org]
>Gesendet: Montag, 12. August 2013 10:07
>An: Log4NET Dev
>Betreff: Ideas for a new RollingFileAppender
>
>[just changing the subject :-)]
>
>On 2013-08-12, Dominik Psenn
[just changing the subject :-)]
On 2013-08-12, Dominik Psenner wrote:
> Yesterday it became quite late and I had not the mental force to write down
> my vision of the RFA reimplementation:
> The log filename should be determined dynamically to allow users including
> information like %date, %t
17 matches
Mail list logo
