Will parsers break if we start logging the GC cause as part of the PrintGC logging?

[Vitaly Davidovich]

Sounds good and makes sense - thanks.

Sent from my phone
On May 7, 2012 5:32 PM, "Bengt Rutisson" <bengt.rutisson at oracle.com> wrote:

>
> Hi Vitaly,
>
> On 2012-05-07 23:24, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:
>
> Hi Bengt,
>
> Another option would be to enable the extra logging/new format via a VM
> argument? I know there are already tons of them so this is probably
> undesirable, but may provide at least a transition period for customers to
> upgrade their parsers.
>
>
> Agreed, but I would really like to avoid more VM arguments. If we feel
> uncomfortable with this change I think we should just not do it at this
> point in time.
>
> There is a project in planning for a more general logging framework for
> Hotspot. Once that is in place I am sure we will do a major update to the
> GC logging. At that time I guess many parsers will break, so if we feel
> that the proposed change is high risk at the moment I think we should
> postpone it to the major logging overhaul.
>
> I know there has been a JEP written for the new logging framework but that
> JEP is still awaiting publication. Hopefully it will be available soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Bengt
>
>  Sent from my phone
> On May 7, 2012 5:19 PM, "Bengt Rutisson" <bengt.rutisson at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have a webrev out for a change that will add the GC cause to all "Full
>> GC logging". See:
>>
>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.openjdk.hotspot.gc.devel/4527
>>
>> The extra information was intentionally just added to full GCs since
>> this logging already had information for System.gc() calls so we figured
>> that any parsers out there would have to handle this information anyway.
>>
>> It was requested to add the information about the GC cause also to CMS
>> collections. If I start down that path I think I could just as well add
>> the GC cause to all GC logging. If we break any parsers we will probably
>> break them already when we add the cause to CMS GCs.
>>
>> Not sure what the best way to handle this is. Some suggestions:
>>
>> (1) Only add cause to Full GCs (as in my change now)
>> (2) Only add cause to Full GCs and CMS GCs (as I think is what was
>> suggested)
>> (3) Add cause to all GCs (probably the proper but kind of risky way)
>> (4) Only do (1) but file CRs for (2) and (3)
>>
>> Any thoughts? It is really a choice between getting interesting
>> information and risking breaking existing GC log parsers.
>>
>> Here is the latest webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/7166894/webrev.01/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bengt
>> _______________________________________________
>> hotspot-gc-use mailing list
>> hotspot-gc-use at openjdk.java.net
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/hotspot-gc-use
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-use/attachments/20120507/c9acdaea/attachment.html