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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #21790 > unrolled thread

ultralog: new concept of logging API

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-26 22:05 -0800
    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-01-27 10:39 -0800
      Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API vladimirow@mail.ru - 2013-01-27 11:03 -0800
        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-01-27 20:48 +0100
          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-27 20:15 -0800
        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2013-01-27 13:51 -0600
          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-27 19:57 -0800
    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-01-28 05:23 -0400
      Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-28 01:32 -0800
        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-01-28 05:37 -0400
          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-28 02:06 -0800
        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-28 13:49 -0800
          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-29 06:04 -0800
            Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-29 10:19 -0800
            Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2013-01-29 13:10 -0600
              Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-29 11:34 -0800
                Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-29 20:16 -0500
                  Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-29 19:57 -0800
                    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-29 22:56 -0800
                      Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-29 23:19 -0800
                        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-01-30 08:23 -0800
                          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-30 16:54 +0000
                            Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-30 13:33 -0800
                              Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API tisue@cs.nwu.edu (Seth Tisue) - 2013-01-30 16:37 -0500
                            Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API tisue@cs.nwu.edu (Seth Tisue) - 2013-01-30 16:33 -0500
                            Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-30 21:50 -0500
                              Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-31 10:38 +0000
                                Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API T®oll <spooksRus@derbyshire-crania.org> - 2013-01-31 12:30 -0500
                                Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API T®oll <spooksRus@derbyshire-crania.org> - 2013-01-31 12:30 -0500
                                  Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-31 17:55 +0000
                              Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-31 10:48 +0000
                                Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API T®oll <spooksRus@derbyshire-crania.org> - 2013-01-31 12:32 -0500
                                  Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-01-31 17:58 +0000
                                    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-31 21:49 -0800
                        Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-30 21:47 -0500
                          Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-30 21:14 -0800
                    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-01-30 21:43 -0500
                      Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-30 21:11 -0800
    Re: ultralog: new concept of logging API Mikhail Vladimirov <vladimirow@mail.ru> - 2013-01-30 13:43 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#21870

Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:

Still not attributing quotes, I see.

> [Lew wrote:]
> > In other words, no, no measurements.
> 
> I think that discussion about why one may want to make applications garbage-free and why garbage-free applications may perform faster and how much faster they can perform is off-topic here.

Of course it is, because you have no answer for this so you want to ban the question.

You're not convincing me you're anything but a con artist with such tactics.

> Once application is decided, for whatever reason, to be garbage-free, which means that normal data processing flow in the application does not allocate any temporary objects, and once normal data processing flow involves logging, the application has to use some garbage-free logging solution, either home-grown or third party.  In this case mainstream logging frameworks simply does not fit, because they are not garbage-free.  Ultralog demonstrates how API for garbage-free logging framework can be structured without sacrificing code readability.  It does not need to be faster than mainstream frameworks and switching to ultralog in application that is not garbage-free itself should not necessarily lead to performance benefit.

Why not? What other benefit does avoiding GC provide?

> Performance tests I have shows that ultralog is usually not slower than System.out.println() and is not slower than log4j.

That tells us nothing. What sort of "performance" tests? Under what protocols? And "not slower" than 
'println()' is useless; we already know log4j is generally less impactful on performance than the 
'System.out' technique. "Not slower" than log4j, even if your tests are not just crocks of porcine 
excrement, is not impressive.

You have yet to tout a real benefit. You get diversionary when people ask about your benefits.
You were asked about "any impact" (beneficial or otherwise) and you chose to interpret it as 
a question about performance, then tried to claim that performance, the topic you introduced, 
was off topic. 

And again, when potential users ask about things that matter to them, you try to tell them that 
their concerns are not valid. That's shitty marketing.

I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but garbage, based on what 
you've told us and how you disrespect us.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21874

On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>
> Still not attributing quotes, I see.

[snip]

> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but garbage, based on what
> you've told us and how you disrespect us.

Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
Still, never mind, at least you're trying to do something constructive.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21884

> Still, never mind, at least you're trying to do something constructive.
Lew is doing good work bumping this discussion up.  This is why I'm feeding the troll :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21886

Mikhail Vladimirov - 0ne dummass rube wrote:
>That Derbyshire wannabe programmer wrote:
>> Still, never mind, at least you're trying to do something constructive.
>Lew is doing good work bumping this discussion up.  This is why I'm feeding the troll :)

and flailing mostly.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21885

lipska the kat <twisted0n3@gmail.com> aka Paul G Derbyshire wrote:
>On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>
>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>
>[snip]
>
>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but garbage, based on what
>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>
>Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>Still, never mind, at least you're trying to do something constructive.
>
>lipska

STFU - morphing militant G00n.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21901

On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>
>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>
> [snip]
>
>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>> garbage, based on what
>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>
> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.

Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
I assume you are talking about yourself.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21916

On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>
>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>>> garbage, based on what
>>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>>
>> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>
> Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
> I assume you are talking about yourself.

Ha ha, very funny, I didn't actually mention a name did I ?

You on the other hand made the correct assumption when you said.
"Since Lew ... "

Very, very funny. I mean really, almost Fawlty Towers funny.

You knew EXACTLY who I was talking about.

jeez.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21929

lipska the kat wriggled:
  <tNGdnS7ETNsL1JfMnZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@bt.com>:
>On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>>>> garbage, based on what
>>>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>>
>> Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
>> I assume you are talking about yourself.
>
>Ha ha, very funny, I didn't actually mention a name did I ?
>
funny that, eh.
you can't be wrong, like... in dodging commitment.

>You on the other hand made the correct assumption when you said.
>"Since Lew ... "
>
obtuse cunt.
catching your act over in RAT(v) one has to wonder if the 
only self administered cure open to you is >240gr of pB!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21930

lipska the kat wriggled:
  <tNGdnS7ETNsL1JfMnZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@bt.com>:
>On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>>>> garbage, based on what
>>>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>>
>> Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
>> I assume you are talking about yourself.
>
>Ha ha, very funny, I didn't actually mention a name did I ?
>
funny that, eh.
you can't be wrong, like... in dodging commitment.

>You on the other hand made the correct assumption when you said.
>"Since Lew ... "
>
obtuse cunt.
catching your act over in RAT(v) one has to wonder if the 
only self administered cure open to you is >240gr of pB!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21932

On 31/01/13 17:30, T®oll wrote:
> lipska the kat wriggled:
>    <tNGdnS7ETNsL1JfMnZ2dnUVZ8hmdnZ2d@bt.com>:
>> On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.

[snip]

> obtuse cunt.
> catching your act over in RAT(v) one has to wonder if the
> only self administered cure open to you is>240gr of pB!!

Hmm, interesting line in abuse there pal.

Not very classy though is it you imbecile.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21917

On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>
>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>>> garbage, based on what
>>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>>
>> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>
> Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
> I assume you are talking about yourself.

We just had a vote here in the office.

The question was

"Would you rather play foosball or read cljp in your rest periods"

foosball 2 votes
cljp 4 votes

Very, very funny.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21931

lipska the kat gloated:
  <eqOdnePZ-Oxo1pfMnZ2dnUVZ8oqdnZ2d@bt.com>:
>On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I think that your product, far from being garbage free, is nothing but
>>>> garbage, based on what
>>>> you've told us and how you disrespect us.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately you've bumped into the village idiot here Mikhail.
>>
>> Since Lew is contributing with about 10000 times as much as you, then
>> I assume you are talking about yourself.
>
>We just had a vote here in the office.
>
liar.
the office space of your fabricated cabal is as closeted
as is your intent to work, at anything.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21933

On 31/01/13 17:32, T®oll wrote:
> lipska the kat gloated:
>    <eqOdnePZ-Oxo1pfMnZ2dnUVZ8oqdnZ2d@bt.com>:
>> On 31/01/13 02:50, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 1/30/2013 11:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>>> On 30/01/13 16:23, Lew wrote:
>>>>> Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not attributing quotes, I see.
>>>>
>>>> [snip]

>> We just had a vote here in the office.
>>
> liar.
> the office space of your fabricated cabal is as closeted
> as is your intent to work, at anything.

Well that's a bit better than your last pathetic offering.

I'll give it 1/10 for abuse although I thought "fabricated cabal" was 
quite good.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21946

Sorry for offtopic.

Lipska, Troll, Arne, Seth, I understand that you have much to say to each other, but could you do this in some other place?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21900

On 1/30/2013 2:19 AM, Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>> In other words, no, no measurements.
> I think that discussion about why one may want to make applications
> garbage-free and why garbage-free applications may perform faster and
> how much faster they can perform is off-topic here.

No.

If your argument for why your logger is better than the common
ones is that it is faster, then it is very on topic to ask
how much it is faster.

If it is 1% faster then the interest may not be so big. If it is
50% faster then a lot of people could be interested in trying it.

> Once application is decided, for whatever reason, to be garbage-free,
> which means that normal data processing flow in the application does
> not allocate any temporary objects, and once normal data processing
> flow involves logging, the application has to use some garbage-free
> logging solution, either home-grown or third party.  In this case
> mainstream logging frameworks simply does not fit, because they are
> not garbage-free.  Ultralog demonstrates how API for garbage-free
> logging framework can be structured without sacrificing code
> readability.  It does not need to be faster than mainstream
> frameworks and switching to ultralog in application that is not
> garbage-free itself should not necessarily lead to performance
> benefit.

If one has religious beliefs against GC then a GC free app
certainly makes sense.

But otherwise it would be the actual difference in performance (and
performance characteristics) that matter.

> Performance tests I have shows that ultralog is usually not slower
> than System.out.println() and is not slower than log4j.

That does not sound good for you.

If your supposed faster logger is not faster, then it is pretty\
difficult to argue to switch to it.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21912

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:47:45 AM UTC+4, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> If your argument for why your logger is better than the common
> ones is that it is faster, then it is very on topic to ask
> how much it is faster.
Fortunately, this is not my argument.  My argument is that it is garbage-free, lock-free and yet has clear syntax.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21899

On 1/29/2013 10:57 PM, Mikhail Vladimirov wrote:
>>> 1. Garbage-free logging.  You can format and send out log message
>>> without allocating any new objects. 2. Lock-free logging.  you
>>> can format and send out log message without acquiring any locks.
>>> 3. Log message templates are compiled into Java bytecode in run
>>> time or even in compile time, which makes message formatting
>>> really fast.
>> Any measurements of the impact for some realistic code?
> The idea that high-performance application may want to process data
> without producing garbage is not something new.  Check, for example,
> this link: http://oreilly.com/catalog/javapt/chapter/ch04.html
>
> The same could be said about lock-free design.  It is well known
> approach to increase performance of multi-threaded applications.

Sure.

But did you measure if it actually does result in a significant
difference in performance?

If not then the performance argument is a bit thin.

> Ultralog is not the first Java library designed to be garbage- and
> lock-free and focused on demands of high performance applications.
> See, for example, LMAX Disruptor:
> http://lmax-exchange.github.com/disruptor/  It is all about hot to
> avoid lock and garbage creation and it states itself as "High
> Performance Inter-Thread Messaging Library".

I know about the LMAX Disruptor.

It is not a logging framework.

> Ultralog is even not the first attempt to create garbage-free logging
> framework for Java.  See, for example, the following link:
> https://bitbucket.org/vladimir.dolzhenko/gflogger/wiki/Home  It
> states its goal as "to create ad-hoc logger for low latency (latency
> critical) applications (to be precise for latency critical execution
> path) which will affect application explicit and implicit (though gc
> pauses) as less as it possible".  It does not claim itself to be
> lock-free though.
>
> What is new in ultralog in comparison with gflogger, is that it
> demonstrates that garbage-free logging could be done without
> sacrificing code readability.

OK.

But that raises the question: why did that logger fail to achieve
traction?

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21911

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:43:03 AM UTC+4, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> But did you measure if it actually does result in a significant
> difference in performance?
> 
> If not then the performance argument is a bit thin.
Ultralog is not supposed to be faster logger.  It supposed to be garbage-free and lock-free logger.  If one is developing garbage-free application, he or she has to use garbage-free logger, even if it is slower that mainstream one.  If one is developing lock-free application, lock-free logger is needed.

Though, performance tests I did show that ultralog is at least not slower than log4j which is de facto standard mainstream logging framework.

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:43:03 AM UTC+4, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> But that raises the question: why did that logger fail to achieve
> traction?
Maybe it didn't fail.  Maybe it failed because people was not ready to sacrifice code readability for performance and use home-grown solutions instead.  Who knows?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21887

BTW.  I've released ultralog 0.1 which is first full featured release of ultralog suitable for real use: http://code.google.com/p/ultralog/downloads/detail?name=ultralog-0.1.zip

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web