Re: JDBC Logging & log4j
От | Peter V Cooper |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JDBC Logging & log4j |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5.1.0.14.0.20020317073009.00af0878@mail.dc3.adelphia.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | JDBC Logging & log4j ("Dave Cramer" <Dave@micro-automation.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: JDBC Logging & log4j
("Dave Cramer" <Dave@micro-automation.net>)
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
I would vote no on mandatory driver logging. Maybe one could construct a comment based stub which would have a utility run against the code to include the debugging code much like a real pre-compiler. This seems problematical and less desirable IMHO to just dealing with the logs in the backend for support purposes. By default I would hope the driver is not burdened extensive and expensive logging code. I guess it depends on what a persons need is. I prefer the simplicity we have now. Of course I am not a source contributor so I may be out of line in my suggestions. BTW, if driver logging was included I would probably stay on the previous release and eventually write a utility to strip it out especially if it required a bunch of perl modules. I went to java servlets to be rid of perl. Perl may be fun to write and I like it personally but it is too wierd for many in my organization. Just one voice. At 04:15 PM 3/16/2002 -0500, Dave Cramer wrote: >A number of people have asked about logging in the driver, and >specifically about the use of log4j. > >There are a number of issues with this. > >1) It means that we have to have another jar, and likely include in the >distribution. For folks that don't use java this is a burden. Think of >it this way, do you want to download a bunch of perl modules with the >driver so you can use jdbc? > >2) log4j uses a propery file to load it's configuration and it seems >there are some *very* creative ways to load database drivers out there >which do not load the log4j properties correctly. > >3) Regardless of how fast log4j is or isn't it is still will slow the >driver down. And as Hans pointed out java has no preprocessing so we >either get logging in there or not. > >4) log4j does facilitate changing the loglevel at runtime instead of >compile time, but we still run into issues where we have to create a >string object to log whereas now we don't so code like: > > foo(getInfofrombackend()) > >Becomes > > String msg = getInfofrombackend(); > logger.debug(msg); > foo(msg); > >So the question is: > >Do we want to put logging in the driver? >Why? >How much? >At what cost? > >I have given some thought to question 1) above and we could use a >pluggable logger so that log4j could be used if configured or, there >would be a default logger. However this would only slow things down even >more. > >Dave > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > >http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: