7:19 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl(a)redhat.com>
To: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: devel(a)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(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: devel(a)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-...
> > > > > >
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3222895/what-is-the-issue-with-the-run...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yair
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Devel mailing list
> > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>