On 7/24/13 12:56 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > I'm working my way through the open DBCP bugs with a view to getting the > DBCP code (and the POOL code as some changes may be required there) into > a state where it is ready for the first v2 release. > > I've quickly reached DBCP-154 that requests that logging is added. This > is not a new request and goes back to DBCP-4 and possibly earlier. From > memory there are a number of open DBCP bugs that require some form of > logging. There are also lots of places where DBCP logs directly to > stdout or stderr. > > This quickly brings us to the point of having to decide which logging > framework to use. This is largely the same debate we had for POOL [1] > but with a few key differences: > - there are many more places where logging is required > - there are many more places where logging could be useful > > Because of the volume of logging, I don't believe the JMX approach used > for POOL is viable for DBCP. > > Therefore, I intend to go ahead and add a dependency on Commons-Logging.
First, many thanks for jumping back in! I have two basic questions: 1) Do we absolutely need logging itself or is there some other way we could satisfy the needs here? IIRC, there are basically two things that "require" logging in DBCP: a) abandoned connections b) exceptions / warnings. In a), we want users to be able to log the stack trace of the code that opened the connection. Case b) splits into all kinds of different stuff. This may be a little smelly, but I wonder if we could not shove what is really needed in normal operations into JMX properties (which would just hold information from recent messages) and support a debug mode where things get spewed as today to System.err or a configured LogWriter. 2) Are there any real reasons that commons-logging will not meet the need? I have read the other messages on this thread and have not seen a concrete reason, other than "others like slf2j better." Have we in fact definitively resolved the classloader-related issues that used to make commons-logging a bad choice? If the answer to 1) is we absolutely need logging and 2) comes down to a matter of taste, I am +1 on commons-logging because I agree with the dogfood argument and also do-ocracy ;) Phil > > Mark > > > [1] http://markmail.org/message/zuufedzkfx62v5eq > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > . > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
