Thanks for the help Nicko,
I'm actually writing a .NET service that will run 24x7 with (hopefully) no
restarts :)
So I think the solution you have proposed would work in this instance of the
problem. At other times, however, we would use log4net from an application
and in those cases we would hav
> The immediate solution is just the do your own build of log4net with
changed
> values in the Level class and any necessary changes made to the
> EventLogAppender.GetEntryType() and AspNetTraceAppender.Append() methods.
That will have to do for now... even with the extra effort still better than
> > Currently this is not supported. E.g. changing the relative
> ordering
> > of
> the
> > Info and Error levels will confuse the way EventLogAppender maps to
> > event log entry types.
>
> So what would need to change to avoid this? Or where is the
> mapping performed, as I might go ahead
Another solution is to ignore the main issue.
A log file using XML format is not appendable. By this I mean that opening
an existing file and appending breaks the file format. Therefore we would
just say that using the FileAppender in append mode with this file format is
not supported. The header
> -Original Message-
> From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 June 2004 10:52
> To: Log4NET User
> Cc: general@logging.apache.org
> Subject: RE: XML Layout
>
>
> Hi Nicko,
>
> We are facing exactly the same problem in log4j. As you
> describe, a file handled by a Roll
> Currently this is not supported. E.g. changing the relative ordering of
the
> Info and Error levels will confuse the way EventLogAppender maps to event
> log entry types.
So what would need to change to avoid this? Or where is the mapping
performed, as I might go ahead and make the necessary ch
Ok, I see what you are doing.
Currently this is not supported. E.g. changing the relative ordering of the
Info and Error levels will confuse the way EventLogAppender maps to event
log entry types.
There are a couple of possible solutions:
One is to define (or redefine) the logging levels in the c
Thats what I was thinking Chad.
- Original Message -
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Log4NET User"
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: Dyanmic Levels.
Wouldn't it make sense to allow people to specify custom levels or
redefine existing ones in the config file?
Wouldn't it make sense to allow people to specify custom levels or
redefine existing ones in the config file?
This seems to fit in with the overall philosophy of log4net (putting
most, if not all the power of logging into the admin/configure-person's
hands).
Thoughts?
-Chad
-Original Messag
> What changes would you envision making? Especially what would you be
> changing more than once?
Well, any changes I make to the Log4net code needs to be updated when the
next beta build comes along.
But anyways, in the way things work here, we'd really like to see the INFO
level being second lo
> -Original Message-
> From: Hollywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 05 June 2004 15:20
> To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
> Subject: Fw: Dyanmic Levels.
>
> Am I correct in assuming that at this time functionality for
> dynamically changing the ordering of the the Levels in the
Hi Nicko,
We are facing exactly the same problem in log4j. As you describe, a
file handled by a RollingFileAppender may open and close a file
multiple times, writing the header and footer as many times.
If one ignores good software design principles for a moment, in
particular separation of concern
Matthew,
Layouts support Header and Footer properties. These are written each time
the file is opened or closed respectively. The issue is that a file may be
opened and closed multiple times, therefore there may be multiple headers
and footers in the file. To work as an XML file there must only be
Matthew,
Layouts support Header and Footer properties. These are written each time
the file is opened or closed respectively. The issue is that a file may be
opened and closed multiple times, therefore there may be multiple headers
and footers in the file. To work as an XML file there must only be
People still use DTDs?
Wow, that's so 1997 :)
-Chad
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Easlea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 5:42 PM
To: 'Log4NET User'
Subject: RE: XML Layout
Thanks Nicko,
I can understand where you are coming from with keeping the XMLLayout
gene
15 matches
Mail list logo
