Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #4544

Re: analysis of java application logs

Show key headers only | View raw

In article <irgm61$944$1@news.albasani.net>, Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>
wrote:

> Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > Lew wrote:
> >> Martin Gregorie wrote:
> >>> Fair point. However, my usual debugging statement takes the form:
> >>>
> >>> if (debug>   0)
> >>>     debugger.trace(result + " = method(" + arg + ")");
> >>>
> >>> Ugly, I know, but quite efficient, since when debugging is off even the
> >>> cost of the method call cost is. I use an integer to control debugging
> >>> rather than a boolean so I can control its volume: "java Application
> >>> -dd" would be expected to provide more detailed debugging output than
> >>> "java Application -d"
> 
> >> What's wrong with
> >>
> >>     if ( logger.isDebugEnabled() ) ...
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>     if ( logger.getLevel().isGreaterOrEqual( Logger.DEBUG )) ...
> >> ?
> 
> > Not a lot, though that does involve method call overheads that you may
> > not want in a tight loop.
> 
> Seems like it's a simple equality test that would be HotSpotted away.

My understanding of the log4j and java.util.Logger classes is that each
logger exists within a hierarchy of classes, and that to determine
whether or not a specific logger call will produce output, the library
must test each level, starting at the specific class and traversing
upwards in the hierarchy. 

So using a static variable as below to enable and disable logging
output can save some execution time:

static final boolean debug = false;

if( debug ) {
  logger.debug(...);
}

Whether or not that is significant, depends upon the situation, of
course.

-- 
Jim Gibson

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

analysis of java application logs Ulrich Scholz <d7@thispla.net> - 2011-05-23 00:50 -0700
  Re: analysis of java application logs Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-23 02:20 -0700
  Re: analysis of java application logs jlp <jlp@jlp.com> - 2011-05-23 11:45 +0200
  Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 09:11 -0400
    Re: analysis of java application logs Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-23 19:16 +0200
      Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 15:02 -0400
        Re: analysis of java application logs Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-23 22:03 +0200
          Re: analysis of java application logs Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-05-26 14:43 -0400
        Re: analysis of java application logs Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-23 18:32 -0300
          Re: analysis of java application logs Ulrich Scholz <d7@thispla.net> - 2011-05-25 06:00 -0700
            Re: analysis of java application logs Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-05-25 19:04 -0300
        Re: analysis of java application logs Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-05-23 22:25 +0000
          Re: analysis of java application logs Nigel Wade <nmw-news@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2011-05-24 12:26 +0100
            Re: analysis of java application logs Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-05-24 12:29 +0000
              Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-24 08:49 -0400
                Re: analysis of java application logs Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-05-24 14:37 +0000
                Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-24 12:26 -0400
                Re: analysis of java application logs Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 11:00 -0700
                Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-24 14:35 -0400
                Re: analysis of java application logs Nigel Wade <nmw-news@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2011-05-25 09:53 +0100
            Re: analysis of java application logs Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-24 19:12 +0200
  Re: analysis of java application logs Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-23 06:17 -0700
    Re: analysis of java application logs Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-23 20:33 +0200
      Re: analysis of java application logs Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-05-23 19:07 +0000
  Re: analysis of java application logs CncShipper <anon@nowhere.com> - 2011-05-23 14:56 +0000
    Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 11:43 -0400
      Re: analysis of java application logs jlp <jlp@jlp.com> - 2011-05-23 18:00 +0200
        Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 12:20 -0400
          Re: analysis of java application logs Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-23 19:06 +0200
            Re: analysis of java application logs Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-23 20:27 +0200
              Re: analysis of java application logs Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-05-23 21:02 +0200
              Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 15:06 -0400
                Re: analysis of java application logs Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-23 22:10 +0200
                Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-23 17:04 -0400
  Re: analysis of java application logs Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-05-24 15:04 +0100
    Re: analysis of java application logs Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-05-24 14:50 +0000
      Re: analysis of java application logs Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@newsguy.com> - 2011-05-26 14:58 -0400
      Re: analysis of java application logs Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-05-30 16:23 +1200
        Re: analysis of java application logs Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-05-30 01:08 -0400

csiph-web