If so, does this mean that by default, with the failover transport commons-logging logs to where it tries to connect ?
James.Strachan wrote: > > 2008/11/4 selezovikj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> So failover tries to log that it is connected, but it cannot log since it >> is >> not connected. >> But, my question is: connected where ? >> Why doesn't failover log locally that it is connected ? Why can't it log >> without being connected ? It can just log locally. > > It logs with commons-logging. Its up to you to define where these log > messages go (locally versus remotely over JMS etc). > > Did you try Dejan's suggestion? > > -- > James > ------- > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > > Open Source Integration > http://fusesource.com/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Commons-logging-conflict-with-failover-tp20323028p20324814.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
