Jay Balunas wrote:
----- "Brian Stansberry"
> I see 3 different issues here:
> 1) Code that does per-request logging at DEBUG level instead of TRACE.
> That's in violation of the logging standards and should be fixed.
+1 and that is what we are seeing to some extent. We don't regularly need to known
every time a class is loaded, or a persistence connection is closed.
> 2) How much we log at DEBUG as part of service startup/shutdown.
> this is not a huge problem. We should probably clean it up some, but
> the point of the logging is to make problem diagnosis easier, not to
> produce small logs for infrequent events.
Start up time in no little issue, but in general I agree. if there is extra logging
during start up thats fine. The real issue is the reoccurring logs
> 3) The default loggging level for server.log. If #1 is broken, then
> having it be INFO makes sense, otherwise we punish users for our
> problems. If #1 is fixed, then different people can have different
> preferences, which I expect we're about to debate here. :-) My
> one is to leave it at DEBUG, unless we can make it configurable via
> system property substitution. Otherwise all testsuite runs will log
> INFO unless we introduce testsuite hacks to replace the logging conf.
IMO - I would like to see it at info, and use an ant command to adjust the debug level
for hudson builds. Why punish our users so that the continuous builds log enough.
Log4j supports a basic system property substitution, so the server.log
logging level can be controlled that way. I'll selfishly add that --
since it will help Bela in some stuff he's doing this week that in turn
helps me. ;)
Note that JBAS-6205 doesn't include changing the default to INFO. I
think INFO's fine, but it's not my call and in any case it's a separate
JIRA that involves some extra work (to get the testsuites to log at DEBUG).
Lead, AS Clustering
JBoss, a division of Red Hat