Hi Mike On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Mike D <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Claus, > > Thanks for your response. Your short-term proposal would work well for me > (in fact I log stack traces as DEBUG in many parts of my own code). I don't > know if the other camel users would find this an inconvenience though. I do > appreciate you giving it some consideration. >
Its morning here and I am working my way through the xx+ number of mails, and starting to wake up due the coffee. So I may as well give some more though and background. The consumers in Camel have the ExceptionHandler as a sort of last sort of idem when an exception was thrown during processing, and the exception was not handled. The error handler in Camel does handle all exceptions occurred during routing. But in the past the error handler did not log when an exception occurred. So what could happen is the exception would propagate back to the consumer. And if the consumer did not log it either, the exception could go unnoticed. Hence why the exception handler (LoggingExceptionHandler) is that last sort of defense which logs the exception at ERROR level so ppl would see it. Now recently the error handler in Camel will by default log when and at the point of time when an Exception occurred during routing. So you may say that the LoggingExceptionHandler is less needed now. So we may consider lowering it to DEBUG by default. Or maybe even log a WARN with the message only, and the stacktrace at DEBUG. Let me create a ticket for the short term solution. > Regards, > Mike > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/How-can-I-disable-stack-traces-from-GenericFileOnCompletion-s-LoggingExceptionHandler-tp3424278p3425763.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: [email protected] Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
