Hi again,
I know there's no strict answer on when to use each log level, but here's the
final standard I decided on. Maybe others will find it helpful as a starting
point.
I did add my own log level, TRACE (for recording metrics), as part of my own
extensions to log4net. As s
I find it helpful to put a small comment block next to my loggers in my
config file:
A new production system is set to INFO for a few days then moves to
WARN or ERROR.
I don't know how I feel about people adding new logging levels to their
projects. I think the built in levels are more than ade
Title: RE: when to use each log level
Simon,
I would use FATAL for errors that cause my program to stop functioning alltogether, or close to it. For example, an application of mine monitors several external mailboxes for events and acts on them if they occur. If one of the mailboxes would
erested in what others have to say about
>this.
>Erik
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Simon Wallis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 3:05 PM
>To: log4net-user@logging.apache.org
>Subject: when to use each log level
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I w
Title: RE: when to use each log level
Simon,
I would use INFO for, well, informational messages like 'User 234 successfully logged in' or statistical information if you shoose to log that in this manner. WARN is for non-critical errors like 'Unable to access SQL server, but
Hi,
I would like to set some guidelines for developers in my team on when each
logging level should be used. Can someone who's been using this for a while
provide some guidance?
Eg.,
FATAL - use when a critical system failure happens. This is a situation where
someone would want to be paged in
