Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!selfless.tophat.at!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Ulrich Scholz Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: analysis of java application logs Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 06:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 20 Message-ID: <1a96b712-59cd-4571-953b-eadaa0ec5322@r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.156.183.195 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1306328415 16938 127.0.0.1 (25 May 2011 13:00:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 13:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: r20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=62.156.183.195; posting-account=6nLwcwoAAACyuDWy5iNg9hYCXPlbqduH User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:2.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0.1,gzip(gfe) Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:4574 On 23 Mai, 23:32, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > > The solution was pretty simple, and it's dynamic. [...] We had to [...] > wrap > log4j calls with a plethora of methods that would result in messages > formatted to our liking, but after that the heavy lifting was and is > done: it's now up to the clients - *not* to the developers - to request > what gets logged and in what manner. Thanks for your answer. Your approach sounds reasonable. But what exactly do you mean with "wrap log4j calls"? Couln=B4t you just use different log4j appenders, one for each client? The appenders would then (i) decide whether to log a given message for a particular client and (ii) format it accordingly. Ulrich