----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Martin Perina" <mperina@redhat.com> Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com>, devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 5:07:28 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Perina" <mperina@redhat.com> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 5:34:51 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 4:25:54 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 10:02:15 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs@redhat.com> To: "Martin Perina" <mperina@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 12:57:49 PM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Perina" <mperina@redhat.com> To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> Cc: devel@ovirt.org Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 10:43:59 AM Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging framework
Hi Yair,
I had in my mind to clean up logging framework mess for quite some time :-) Currently this is the usage of logging frameworks in engine classes:
java.util.logging.Logger 6.8% org.apache.commons.logging.Log 7.8% org.apache.log4j.Logger 13.6% org.ovirt.engine.core.utils.log.Log 68.8% org.slf4j.Logger 2.9%
I think we should definitely use only 1 logging framework for the whole engine!
So +1 to slf4j from me.
+1 from me as well.
+1
+1 to slf4j. I started using that exclusively in Java projects 4 years ago :)
Just be careful if we're introducing it as a new dependency. (It's provided by Fedora, but there might be conflicts if JBoss/Wildfly uses it. We should use that same version, if it does.)
We already have a dependency to slf4j 1.7.5 in the root pom.xml. And AFAIK 1.7.2 is a part of EAP 6.
The jboss we are using provides slf4j-1.6.1, while it seems to be patched to support varargs[1] as 1.7.x.
Ha, you are right, inside JBoss it works, because they did the same thing as with log4j. They provide same classes as slf4j, but with their own different implementation with JBoss Logging backend :-( So if you compile with slf4j 1.7, you can use varargs even when JBoss tries to tell us it provides slf4j 1.6 ...
As standalone at fedora there is slf4j which is compatible and at rhel there is slf4j-eap6 both are 1.7.x. However for centos we use jpackage which provides only 1.6.1[2]. So for standalone packages we may experience issues if were build using varargs.
[1] logger.debug("format", obj1, obj2, obj3, ...) [2] http://jpackage.org/browser/rpm.php?jppversion=6.0&id=12435
AFAIK the only non JBoss usage of logging is at engine-config and engine-manage-domains. So we have 2 options: 1) Use log4j in engine-config and engine-manage-domains (current status) and use slf4j in the rest of engine 2) Package slf4j 1.7.x as our dependency I would prefer option 1). Btw in RHEL7 there is packaged slf4j 1.7.5
Note that GWT UI code uses java.util.logging exclusively to do all logging. (GWT emulates java.util.logging API and provides log handlers for use on client side such as console.log() or stdout/DevMode-during-debug handlers.)
And once we agree to 1 logging framework, I can start preparing patches to use it.
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> > To: devel@ovirt.org > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 8:15:55 AM > Subject: [ovirt-devel] Question/thoughts about our engine logging > framework > > Hi all, > During my recent work on AAA, I was suggested by Juan Hernandez > to > use > slf4j > logging framework which serves as a facade for other logging > frameworks > (including java utils logging which is now used by jboss), log4j > and > others. > I have accepted Juan's offer, and then when looking at our > LogFactory > class > I > have noticed we use commons logging. > > Several thoughts/questions - > A. Why continue use our own wrapper as slf4j is already a facade. > b. I think we should move cross java code to slf4j. What do you > think > on > this > point? > > Some reading material - > > http://javarevisited.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/why-use-sl4j-over-log4j-for-log... > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3222895/what-is-the-issue-with-the-runtim... > > > > Yair > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel@ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel