On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Atlas <erde@chello.at> wrote:
It's all a matter of viewpoint, that's why we should include as many of them possible :)
But, even though the answer was not directed as me, I'd like to step in:
Log4J does a good job of what I would consider the laymen spirit of logging production > he default event logging done captures the specific of class, line number, timestamp, method et als.
A dog's breakfast actually.
Strings lack self-description and this causes many unnecessary architectural problems.
As Doru already pointed out, you have to write parsers and analysers to interpret the output. And since might be many different formats for the same thing (dialects), you lose uniformity and have to handle all corner cases. Worse yet, there is the implicit assumption that the software (or human) inspecting the log has to understand all formats, i.e. has to have knowledge about: What the names of the classes and methods mean, which subsystems (MQ, databases) are in use and how their communication protocols look like etc. And that does not factor in possible format changes or versions of subsystems.
It's hard to write generic browsers and analysers (the automated tooling Doru pointed out) that way. Also, there is the problem of reusing these parsers and analyers and code duplication, maintenance issues etc.
With that said, ultimately, it depends on the use cases.* For a fixed set * of inspection use cases, this logging strategy might work fine. But it certainly lacks the real flexibility to make a system more accessible and to adopt the generated information to the person and it's needs and viewpoints. You cannot address that easily with Log4j (or any logging facility for that matter). As for Log4j and its 7 levels of logging: Why not 8, 9 or a 100? What does INFO really mean? To whom? It all depends on the context.
There are many, many usage scenarios and even more might pop up with more accessible and comprehensible logging schemes.
We need to go far beyond logging.
Sure but with tools like http://www.fluentd.org/, and http://riemann.io/concepts.html, we are really blown out of the water with those logs we have now. Text is here to stay once we get into the sysadmin realm. People do not want to deal with code internals when they are doing the piping. Just my experience dealing with such admins working with a lot of different systems. We cannot ask them to become polyglot coders as their hands are full already. Phil
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/What-Logging-framework-for-Pharo-tp4799073p4799254.htm... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-- --- Philippe Back Visible Performance Improvements Mob: +32(0) 478 650 140 | Fax: +32 (0) 70 408 027 Mail:phil@highoctane.be | Web: http://philippeback.eu Blog: http://philippeback.be | Twitter: @philippeback Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/philippeback/videos High Octane SPRL rue cour Boisacq 101 | 1301 Bierges | Belgium Pharo Consortium Member - http://consortium.pharo.org/ Featured on the Software Process and Measurement Cast - http://spamcast.libsyn.com Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ability Engineering EADocX Value Added Reseller