You
wrote that monolog is much superior to the standard (but could not provide a
proof).
Maybe
you don't know, but java.util.logging is not a logging output system, but
only a middleware that enables a common interface to different output
systems. So the assumption is false that we could provide a
Sun-backend, since java.util.logging isn't a backend at all but an API
only. It is possible with few effort to attach new backends (NT Event,
SysLog, Files etc.) to java.util.logging and to provide adapters to other
logging systems (Log4J, Monolog etc.). Actually I am leading an open source
project that implemented java.util.logging backends for NT Event Log and
SysLog (Linux and Solaris) and that works well (not published yet). The
implementation was a few ten lines.
Hmmmm.....
Do you really think it is a ONE LOGGING FOR ALL decision
?
I really would prefer a way to support different APIs (because they
simply are there...) with very efficient "adapters" but ONE central place
for runtime configurataion (GUI) of logging levels for different parts
(Jonas and Tomcat themselfes, web-apps, EJBs, etc.) AND configuring
the direction of the logging output (file, console, NT Eventlog under
Windows,...). Maybe to log4j or maybe to the Sun logging...or
whatever..
Of course we simply could decide to remove the Enhydra logging API
and recommend the usage of common-logging, monolog ...
BUT:
Jetty has another "LogSink"
API...
Barracuda MVC framework www.barracudamvc.org (working
perfectly with Enhydra XMLC !) has another logging
API
I think this story will never
end...
I think when we talk about logging we should think a little bit
more about the job of a system-administrator that has to keep the beast
up-and-running. Lets consider new services or ready to use
web-apps that could be added to or used with Jonas by different
communities. They may use another API... I think the goal of Objcetweb is
to provide flexible components and infrastructure for other components and
applications. If the administrator has to know all details of the
implementation and configuration of logging in all parts of a big
installation, the system will become very complex to manage. OKOK, I'll
stop now :-)
Of course I do not have the perfect plan how to resolve all these
issues, but I hope I could show that the topic is a little bit more
complex than "common-logging or monolog" or the discussion of logging of
Objectweb/Jonas components only.
And if I am thinking about web-app war-files, how can deployed
web-app war-files have automatically new entries in the configuration
application GUI for setting the application-specific logging level ? Is
there some kind of standard for that ?
Greetings.
Alfred
Gérard Vandome wrote:
Madl Alfred wrote:
Hi !
What about providing an "adapter" implementation for common-logging API to the monolog API ? The idea would simply be to "redirect" calls made to the common-logging API to monolog and in fact doing configuration and logging level setting in monolog (I like the Jonas Web Admin GUI for setting loglevels !).
It can be a good solution, if it doesn't introduce overhead.
I cc the architecture mailing list as I think the best is to move the discussion there.
This might work, but my opinion is we should move
logging to common-logging.
This discussion has already taken
place in the ObjectWeb architecture team, and many of us (not yet all ;)
believe Monolog is a dead end now.
We do not need one more logging
technology, Apache has gained the required momentum, not us. Also, some
of our products include or use Apache modules, that already use
commons-logging...
Of course, the JonasAdmin problem remains: the
question is, do the Jonas team plan to move to commons-logging some time
? (Gerard seems to envisage it, at least...)
Providing the wrapper
you suggest could be considered a temporary solution,
then...
Regards,
Pierre-Yves Gibello - ExperLog
Of course the implementation of such an adapter would have to be VERY efficient in order to avoid unnecessary overhead for logging calls !
Just an idea.
Alfred
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Gérard Vandome [mailto:gerard.vandome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Oktober 2003 14:14
An: Madl Alfred
Cc: christophe.ney@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Raicevic Igor; FRANCOIS EXERTIER; Andre Freyssinet; Jeff Mesnil; FRANCOIS EXERTIER
Betreff: Re: Enhydra and Jonas
Madl Alfred wrote:
Hi !
Christophe told me, you could possibly help me:
We would have some technical/architecture oriented questions for
integrating Enhydra 6.0 (the Enhydra application framework) into
Jonas/Tomcat in the area of "logging".
Jonas itself uses the "Objectweb monolog API"
Tomcat itself uses the "Apache common-logging API"
Enhydra EAF has ist own logging API for web applications (currently
implemented for log4j)
I would like to discuss the relationship of these APIs and possible
architecture scenarios in this area for the Enhydra/Jonas integration.
Do you know the best guy to talk to for these questions ? Could I call
him to discuss that ?
It is a very good question, and I am not happy at all with the current JOnAS situation which is still more complicated: JOnAS is also integrating Axis (which are using common logging) and JORAM and JORM (which are using Monolog). JOnAS will soon integrate JOTM (instead of the JOnAS embedded transaction manager) and C-JDBC which are using common logging..
Just an history to explain the current situation:
-ObjectWeb provide Monolog to be able to use either Log4J or JDK logger -then Apache provide Common-Log with the same goal
The curent ObjectWeb recommandation is to use Monolog, but my personnal preference would be to move everything in JOnAS to common-logging. I cc François, Andre and Jef who have more technical arguments....
Gérard Vandôme
ObjectWeb Consortium www.objectweb.org Gerard.Vandome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx +33 (0)4 76 29 76 25
--
Gérard Vandôme
ObjectWeb Consortium www.objectweb.org
Gerard.Vandome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx +33 (0)4 76 29 76 25
