Need comments on JEP-158: Unified JVM Logging

[Richard Warburton]

Hi Fredrik,

In the JEP I tried to explain the concept of 'sub' loggers but I did not
> put in anything about the intent of having them. I think that your
> requirement easily could be solved using sub loggers, or sub components if
> you like that wording better.
>
> Loggers are ordered in an hierarchical tree where 'gc' might be the root
> for all logging in the gc 'area'. The 'details', 'cause' and 'safepoint'
> content types could be translated in to sub loggers to the 'gc' logger. By
> setting log level for the separate sub loggers to enable logging I cant see
> that you would not be able to get the filtering you want. By using log
> levels wisely you will be able to get even more control over what gets
> output in the logs. The above was a much simplified example, in reality you
> would probably have a more elaborate tree of gc loggers. There is nothing
> in the logger three hierarchy approach that implies that they should be big
> blocks of stuff.
>
> Logging topics, tags, or markers were something we considered at the
> beginning of the design phase but we came to the conclusion that we
> probably could solve the requirements by using sub loggers instead.
>
> Please tell me if you don't think this approach would work, and in that
> case why.
>

Thanks for clarifying this point. I think this explanation addresses how
that particular use case is met. I suspect that it might be worth adding a
bit more explanation around this topic to the JEP itself, because I don't
think I'm the only person with this concern.

Also a heads up that there's discussion happening related to this topic
off-list at:
https://groups.google.com/a/jclarity.com/forum/#!topic/friends/NA0EyOJk6bs

regards,

  Richard Warburton

  http://insightfullogic.com
  @RichardWarburto <http://twitter.com/richardwarburto>