From bdw429s at gmail.com  Tue Apr  3 17:38:08 2018
From: bdw429s at gmail.com (Brad Wood)
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 16:38:08 -0500
Subject: [undertow-dev] Tuckey logging shows in nested categories
Message-ID: <CALbQ1okmB6J4w4-r2Oazxa_VWuBrGppDHsdwpPzewqZWjcwkag@mail.gmail.com>

We're using Undertow in a console app that also leverages Tuckey for URL
rewriting.  We're also using Log4j for logging stuff.  I was noticing this
week that most of the log messages from Tuckey seem to be nested inside of
a log message from Undertow-- often times with a different logging
severity.

[INFO ] io.undertow.servlet:
org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.Condition TRACE: outcome false

I can try and provide the details of how we're using Log4j if I need.  I'd
like to be able to do some filtering and such to separate out my Tuckey
logs, but I can't do it easily when they appear to get caught up and
re-logged by Undertow under a different logging category and severity.

Any ideas on what's going on would be welcome.

Thanks!

~Brad

*Developer Advocate*
*Ortus Solutions, Corp *

E-mail: brad at coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180403/c4c60488/attachment.html 

From sdouglas at redhat.com  Tue Apr  3 19:21:19 2018
From: sdouglas at redhat.com (Stuart Douglas)
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 09:21:19 +1000
Subject: [undertow-dev] Tuckey logging shows in nested categories
In-Reply-To: <CALbQ1okmB6J4w4-r2Oazxa_VWuBrGppDHsdwpPzewqZWjcwkag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALbQ1okmB6J4w4-r2Oazxa_VWuBrGppDHsdwpPzewqZWjcwkag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD+L2cwWuiAnGGCSyiExhnru6tBiZutYH-vDQ=odsU-6WY6n5Q@mail.gmail.com>

Tuckey does some funky stuff with logging. It basically has its own thing,
that can delegate to slf4j, but if that is not enabled then it will
basically end up logging using the ServletContext log() methods (or
stderr/stdout).

These methods kind of suck, as they have no way to specify a severity or
category. In our impl the version without an exception logs at INFO, the
version with logs at ERROR. Thinking about it these should really have
their own category to make it clear what is going on here.

https://github.com/paultuckey/urlrewritefilter/blob/master/src/main/java/org/tuckey/web/filters/urlrewrite/utils/Log.java#L444

Other than adding a slf4j bridge and making it use slf4j somehow I don't
know if there is much you can do.

Stuart

On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:38 AM, Brad Wood <bdw429s at gmail.com> wrote:

> We're using Undertow in a console app that also leverages Tuckey for URL
> rewriting.  We're also using Log4j for logging stuff.  I was noticing this
> week that most of the log messages from Tuckey seem to be nested inside of
> a log message from Undertow-- often times with a different logging
> severity.
>
> [INFO ] io.undertow.servlet: org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.Condition TRACE: outcome false
>
> I can try and provide the details of how we're using Log4j if I need.  I'd
> like to be able to do some filtering and such to separate out my Tuckey
> logs, but I can't do it easily when they appear to get caught up and
> re-logged by Undertow under a different logging category and severity.
>
> Any ideas on what's going on would be welcome.
>
> Thanks!
>
> ~Brad
>
> *Developer Advocate*
> *Ortus Solutions, Corp *
>
> E-mail: brad at coldbox.org
> ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
> Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> undertow-dev mailing list
> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180404/9d5b7e0a/attachment.html 

From bdw429s at gmail.com  Tue Apr  3 19:43:14 2018
From: bdw429s at gmail.com (Brad Wood)
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 18:43:14 -0500
Subject: [undertow-dev] Tuckey logging shows in nested categories
In-Reply-To: <CAD+L2cwWuiAnGGCSyiExhnru6tBiZutYH-vDQ=odsU-6WY6n5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALbQ1okmB6J4w4-r2Oazxa_VWuBrGppDHsdwpPzewqZWjcwkag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD+L2cwWuiAnGGCSyiExhnru6tBiZutYH-vDQ=odsU-6WY6n5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALbQ1om=CX1oSuEYKUoeuAE-vjXAG01ApUc2CGpK1=0SvRiX+g@mail.gmail.com>

Wow, good catch.  That makes perfect sense.  We're already using a custom
build of Tuckey that fixes a couple bugs (isn't abandonware great...).  We
might just see about plugging that log method into Log4j to get proper
categories and severities out of it.  Thanks for the help!

Thanks!

~Brad

*Developer Advocate*
*Ortus Solutions, Corp *

E-mail: brad at coldbox.org
ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com


On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas at redhat.com> wrote:

> Tuckey does some funky stuff with logging. It basically has its own thing,
> that can delegate to slf4j, but if that is not enabled then it will
> basically end up logging using the ServletContext log() methods (or
> stderr/stdout).
>
> These methods kind of suck, as they have no way to specify a severity or
> category. In our impl the version without an exception logs at INFO, the
> version with logs at ERROR. Thinking about it these should really have
> their own category to make it clear what is going on here.
>
> https://github.com/paultuckey/urlrewritefilter/blob/master/
> src/main/java/org/tuckey/web/filters/urlrewrite/utils/Log.java#L444
>
> Other than adding a slf4j bridge and making it use slf4j somehow I don't
> know if there is much you can do.
>
> Stuart
>
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:38 AM, Brad Wood <bdw429s at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We're using Undertow in a console app that also leverages Tuckey for URL
>> rewriting.  We're also using Log4j for logging stuff.  I was noticing this
>> week that most of the log messages from Tuckey seem to be nested inside of
>> a log message from Undertow-- often times with a different logging
>> severity.
>>
>> [INFO ] io.undertow.servlet: org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.Condition TRACE: outcome false
>>
>> I can try and provide the details of how we're using Log4j if I need.
>> I'd like to be able to do some filtering and such to separate out my Tuckey
>> logs, but I can't do it easily when they appear to get caught up and
>> re-logged by Undertow under a different logging category and severity.
>>
>> Any ideas on what's going on would be welcome.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> ~Brad
>>
>> *Developer Advocate*
>> *Ortus Solutions, Corp *
>>
>> E-mail: brad at coldbox.org
>> ColdBox Platform: http://www.coldbox.org
>> Blog: http://www.codersrevolution.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> undertow-dev mailing list
>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180403/304f2212/attachment.html 

From stevehu at gmail.com  Thu Apr  5 05:35:58 2018
From: stevehu at gmail.com (Steve Hu)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 05:35:58 -0400
Subject: [undertow-dev] Cache object that is not thread safe
Message-ID: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>

I need to share the same instance of a "Util" object to reuse it in all the
handleRequest calls. Where is the best place to store the Util object
instance? The Util class is not thread safe, so I should have one instance
for each client thread.

Thanks,

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180405/d1890571/attachment-0001.html 

From sdouglas at redhat.com  Thu Apr  5 07:19:42 2018
From: sdouglas at redhat.com (Stuart Douglas)
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 11:19:42 +0000
Subject: [undertow-dev] Cache object that is not thread safe
In-Reply-To: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD+L2cwJYk+21+9KjSP36uOmGiuXEB1vnEU27K=H+7C=gh_52w@mail.gmail.com>

If you want one per thread just use ThreadLocal.

Stuart

On Thu, 5 Apr. 2018, 7:42 pm Steve Hu, <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:

> I need to share the same instance of a "Util" object to reuse it in all
> the handleRequest calls. Where is the best place to store the Util object
> instance? The Util class is not thread safe, so I should have one
> instance for each client thread.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> undertow-dev mailing list
> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180405/8a75671a/attachment.html 

From stevehu at gmail.com  Thu Apr  5 07:36:35 2018
From: stevehu at gmail.com (Steve Hu)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 07:36:35 -0400
Subject: [undertow-dev] Cache object that is not thread safe
In-Reply-To: <CAD+L2cwJYk+21+9KjSP36uOmGiuXEB1vnEU27K=H+7C=gh_52w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD+L2cwJYk+21+9KjSP36uOmGiuXEB1vnEU27K=H+7C=gh_52w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGjN9KVd3APxE2RyQ2m1sbWH_RaX0LvJNHvawBSzizi17rrRGg@mail.gmail.com>

I was thinking about ThreadLocal as it is very popular in Java EE but one
request might be handled by multiple threads from IO thread to worker
thread which means you have to instantiate as many objects as the number of
total threads. Just trying to find if there are any better solutions.
Thanks for your confirmation.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:19 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas at redhat.com> wrote:

> If you want one per thread just use ThreadLocal.
>
> Stuart
>
> On Thu, 5 Apr. 2018, 7:42 pm Steve Hu, <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I need to share the same instance of a "Util" object to reuse it in all
>> the handleRequest calls. Where is the best place to store the Util object
>> instance? The Util class is not thread safe, so I should have one
>> instance for each client thread.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> undertow-dev mailing list
>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180405/ecfa2c7f/attachment.html 

From bill at dartalley.com  Thu Apr  5 07:50:04 2018
From: bill at dartalley.com (Bill O'Neil)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2018 07:50:04 -0400
Subject: [undertow-dev] Cache object that is not thread safe
In-Reply-To: <CAGjN9KVd3APxE2RyQ2m1sbWH_RaX0LvJNHvawBSzizi17rrRGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD+L2cwJYk+21+9KjSP36uOmGiuXEB1vnEU27K=H+7C=gh_52w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGjN9KVd3APxE2RyQ2m1sbWH_RaX0LvJNHvawBSzizi17rrRGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANd+gFxzXuFqE=tyM=bu=jgqSnwJKRAMbG3R9O01AzT2Z+V4VQ@mail.gmail.com>

If it's actually a util object can you make it stateless so that it is
thread safe? Maybe add an additional context type object for state if you
really need it. Attaching it to the exchange as an attachment could work.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Steve Hu <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:

> I was thinking about ThreadLocal as it is very popular in Java EE but one
> request might be handled by multiple threads from IO thread to worker
> thread which means you have to instantiate as many objects as the number of
> total threads. Just trying to find if there are any better solutions.
> Thanks for your confirmation.
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:19 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> If you want one per thread just use ThreadLocal.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Apr. 2018, 7:42 pm Steve Hu, <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I need to share the same instance of a "Util" object to reuse it in all
>>> the handleRequest calls. Where is the best place to store the Util object
>>> instance? The Util class is not thread safe, so I should have one
>>> instance for each client thread.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> undertow-dev mailing list
>>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> undertow-dev mailing list
> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180405/a2b142ab/attachment.html 

From stevehu at gmail.com  Thu Apr  5 08:21:38 2018
From: stevehu at gmail.com (Steve Hu)
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 12:21:38 +0000
Subject: [undertow-dev] Cache object that is not thread safe
In-Reply-To: <CANd+gFxzXuFqE=tyM=bu=jgqSnwJKRAMbG3R9O01AzT2Z+V4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGjN9KUjSxhpWg+AS46bRfR3f+_552m2Pr2LRaWnWJ_HBXvvZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD+L2cwJYk+21+9KjSP36uOmGiuXEB1vnEU27K=H+7C=gh_52w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGjN9KVd3APxE2RyQ2m1sbWH_RaX0LvJNHvawBSzizi17rrRGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANd+gFxzXuFqE=tyM=bu=jgqSnwJKRAMbG3R9O01AzT2Z+V4VQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAGjN9KXnDkeLF3qid_S3xh3xqnAz2__T6=d3pSpY99JWE7mNng@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks. This is another option to explore. The question was asked on behalf
of another user on another forum. I am going to find more info about the
use case. Will pass your answers to him.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018, 7:50 AM Bill O'Neil, <bill at dartalley.com> wrote:

> If it's actually a util object can you make it stateless so that it is
> thread safe? Maybe add an additional context type object for state if you
> really need it. Attaching it to the exchange as an attachment could work.
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Steve Hu <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I was thinking about ThreadLocal as it is very popular in Java EE but one
>> request might be handled by multiple threads from IO thread to worker
>> thread which means you have to instantiate as many objects as the number of
>> total threads. Just trying to find if there are any better solutions.
>> Thanks for your confirmation.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:19 AM, Stuart Douglas <sdouglas at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If you want one per thread just use ThreadLocal.
>>>
>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> On Thu, 5 Apr. 2018, 7:42 pm Steve Hu, <stevehu at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I need to share the same instance of a "Util" object to reuse it in all
>>>> the handleRequest calls. Where is the best place to store the Util object
>>>> instance? The Util class is not thread safe, so I should have one
>>>> instance for each client thread.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> undertow-dev mailing list
>>>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> undertow-dev mailing list
>> undertow-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/undertow-dev/attachments/20180405/0daaa3a9/attachment-0001.html