switch to a new logging framework (Log4Net) (2 Viewers)

[gibman]

Once this is done I could goldplate it with the above mentioned threading model for performace goals

If log4net is any sane logging framework it already should have the actual loggin in a separate thread and only the message queuing is done in the calling thread. Bavarian probably knows if this is the case.

I thought about this too .. although I couldn't find any evidence of this.
ofc. I could try look for the actual code. again I spent 2 min. only google'ing it.

if it's done right, it would support multiple threads writing to the log. it would also make sure the logs are written to disk in the sequence they came in.

/gibman

 

[Sebastiii]

iloop, someone still needs to implement the log levels for every single logging call on TVE side for the verbose to work.

I can do this.
@gibman:
Is it OK for you to merge this branch with your TVE3.5 branch?
If yes, who will do it?

yeah feel free to do it

just remember there are 2 tve3.5 branches .. confusing right ?
@Sebastiii knows more about this

Once this is done I could goldplate it with the above mentioned threading model for performace goals.

/gibman

Now only one is in Github

 

[Bavarian]

just remember there are 2 tve3.5 branches .. confusing right ?
@Sebastiii knows more about this

Once this is done I could goldplate it with the above mentioned threading model for performace goals.
/gibman

Now only one is in Github

Can you please point me to the correct one, because I still see this two branches:
- EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4
- EXP-TV-MP-TV3.5-NET4

 

[morpheus_xx]

EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4 is the right one. On remote the other branch should be gone?

 

[Sebastiii]

@Bavarian you should do a fetch + prune option to clean up old branch

 

[Bavarian]

hmm - maybe I understood the request wrong

The directory structures of the two branches are different, therefore a merge makes no sense.

What I can do is to implement my changes in this EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4 branch once again.
But then then FEAT-3273-Switch_to_log4net branch should not be merged to the master. It would be better to delete it.
Or does anybody (with better git skills then me) knows a better solution?

 

[tourettes]

The directory structures of the two branches are different, therefore a merge makes no sense.

What I can do is to implement my changes in this EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4 branch once again.
But then then FEAT-3273-Switch_to_log4net branch should not be merged to the master. It would be better to delete it.
Or does anybody (with better git skills then me) knows a better solution?

EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4 branch is something that has diverset quite much from the master so direct merges arent possible. FEAT-3273-Switch_to_log4net should be merget to master once it is ready for such (testing and approval). If EXP-TV3.5_MP_NET4 will be part of 1.4.0 then there will be lot of manual merging in any case

 

[gibman]

about logging exceptions vs code cleanliness.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7046399/inject-logging-dependency-with-castle-windsor

just add a attribute to the method u want logged in case of exceptions and avoid the usual code noise with try-catch exceptions.

now thats nice

Another thing is -- at work I'm currently replacing a hardcoded logging impl. with an abstracted impl.
We want to be able to change to any kind of logging framework per app config.

I figured the castle windsor (CW) framework had some logging framework abstraction possibilities.

and it had :=)

<facilities>

<!--- log4net logging, see log.config for log4net options -->
<!--
<facility id="loggingfacility"
type="Castle.Facilities.Logging.LoggingFacility, Castle.Facilities.Logging"
loggingApi="log4net"
configFile="log.config"
/>
-->

so when I use CW to resolve a registered assembly/class they will get an instance of ILogger injected into its constructor.

very neat indeed.
CW has these inbuilt abstractions for the following logging frameworks.

loggingApi="null|console|diagnostics|web|nlog|log4net|custom"

with the 'custom' one we can create our own logger in the future and replace it real easy like.

/gibman

 

[elliottmc]

In terms of getting this fix/change scheduled for a release, where are we?

 

[azzuro]

Hi, when is set for merge ?