While working on
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55215, I was
surprised to discover my log files generated by AccessLogValve do not
seem to be handled by log4j.
I've worked with the various Authenticator Valves and all I could
remember was they used the juli Logger services, which are now being
handled by log4j as I expect.
Because I had forgotten to change server.xml, my entry still looks like
this:
<Valve className="org.apache.catalina.valves.AccessLogValve"
directory="logs"
prefix="access." suffix=".txt"
pattern="common" resolveHosts="false"/>
I checked docs/config/valve.html for guidance on using juli or log4j,
but couldn't find any clues. These, and other, logging-related
parameters are only documented for AccessLogValve and
ExtendedAccessLogValve.
I then looked at the source in tc8 trunk. At first glance, the class
seems implement a self-contained logging system, complete with daily
roll-over logic.
I went back as far as the tc5 source in January 2007. There have been
quite a few changes, but the general idea hasn't changed significantly
since then.
In fact, the current tc8 source seems to me to use both juli and the
self-contained logging println service, e.g.
/**
* Log the specified message to the log file, switching files if
the date
* has changed since the previous log call.
*
* @param message Message to be logged
*/
public void log(CharArrayWriter message) {
rotate();
/* In case something external rotated the file instead */
if (checkExists) {
synchronized (this) {
if (currentLogFile != null && !currentLogFile.exists()) {
try {
close(false);
} catch (Throwable e) {
ExceptionUtils.handleThrowable(e);
log.info(sm.getString("accessLogValve.closeFail"), e);
}
/* Make sure date is correct */
dateStamp = fileDateFormatter.format(
new Date(System.currentTimeMillis()));
open();
}
}
}
// Log this message
try {
synchronized(this) {
if (writer != null) {
message.writeTo(writer);
writer.println("");
if (!buffered) {
writer.flush();
}
}
}
} catch (IOException ioe) {
log.warn(sm.getString(
"accessLogValve.writeFail", message.toString()), ioe);
}
}
Am I being stupid? Have I overlooked something obvious?
If not, does anyone have any historical information about this
implementation? My first thought is that this Valve should simply use
juli (or log4j via the juli adapter) throughout, just the way the other
valves already do.
Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
