logging-log4j-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Smith <psm...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Log4j category for a thread
Date Wed, 09 Jun 2004 00:57:44 GMT
I was thinking about this, but it's just a tiny class that would have a 
Logger available, and then people might want different ThreadLocal loggers 
bound for different purposes.  I'm not sure the class adds a lot of value 
to log4j, but I agree the concept/methodology might be worth having on the 
wiki somewhere..

cheers,

Paul Smith

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Tony Thompson wrote:

> Would it make sense to put something like that in Log4j, since the
> functionality doesn't currently exist?
>
>>>> psmith@apache.org 06/08/04 05:21PM >>>
> I would suggest then simply setting up a ThreadLocal Logger then,
> configured at the start of your request, that all the participants
> expect
> to be there.
>
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Tony Thompson wrote:
>
>>> Pardon my asking but what is wrong with:
>>>
>>>  void getUser() {
>>>      Logger logger = LogManager.getLogger( "org.widgets.getUser" );
>>>  }
>>>
>>> or just
>>>
>>>  void getUser() {
>>>      Logger logger = LogManager.getLogger( "org.widgets" );
>>>  }
>>>
>>> Why should the logging in getUser() care if it has been called by
>> login()
>>> or by logout()?
>>>
>>> Please bear with me, I am trying to understand the use case.
>>
>> No problem.
>>
>> I don't really want getUser() to have its own logging category.  What
> I
>> am concerned about is the end user experience.  If I am the end user
> and
>> I want to see DEBUG for the login process, I shouldn't have to set
> DEBUG
>> levels on more than one category.  I should set DEBUG for
>> "org.widgets.login" and see all of the debug available for the login
>> process.  Plus, getUser() would display DEBUG messages every time
>> logout() is called which is not what I wanted either.
>>
>> Now, as the server developer, I could implement getUser() like this:
>>
>> void getUser( Logger logger ) {
>> }
>>
>> and just pass the logger in every time I call it.  That would
>> accomplish the same thing.  But, I don't really want to mess with all
> of
>> the code that calls getUser() and pass in a Logger.
>>
>> So, to me, the cleanest solution would be to set a Logger for the
>> current thread.  Then getUser() can just grab the "current" logger
> and
>> use that.  It doesn't care because it is only part of a larger
> process
>> anyway.  This is an implementation detail but, you would also need a
>> default category (maybe the root logger) to log messages to in case
> the
>> caller hasn't set a logger context.  Either way, getUser() relies on
>> someone else to tell it what its logger should be.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Mail was checked for spam by the Freeware Edition of No Spam Today!
> The Freeware Edition is free for personal and non-commercial use.
> You can remove this notice by purchasing a full license! To order
> or to find out more please visit: http://www.no-spam-today.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-user-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-user-help@logging.apache.org


Mime
View raw message