Uploaded image for project: 'Log4j 2'
  1. Log4j 2
  2. LOG4J2-324

Potential performance improvement for StatusLogger

VotersWatch issueWatchersLinkCloneUpdate Comment AuthorReplace String in CommentUpdate Comment VisibilityDelete Comments


    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 2.0-beta8
    • Fix Version/s: 2.5
    • Component/s: API
    • Labels:


      From discussion on the mailing list - please feel free to edit this description.

      From: Ralph Goers
      To: Log4J Developers List <log4j-dev@logging.apache.org>
      Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 7:57 AM
      Subject: Re: Config additions, WAS: Confused: want low latency: do I need BOTH async logger AND async appender??

      I think I just came up with another attribute for the JMX element. I'll have to look at the status logger but I believe it is always creating a StatusData object and putting it in a ring buffer so they can be printed later. This will actually create a lot of objects and will impact performance. So we will want to add a statusLevel attribute to the JMX element to specify what the level is on the events that should be added to the buffer.

      It was actually kind of cool though as the person doing the performance test looked at the JMX stats and even though the status was set to error in the configuration they had lots of debug messages in JMX that were quite helpful to verify a misconfiguration.



        Issue Links



            • Assignee:
              rpopma Remko Popma
              rpopma Remko Popma


              • Created:

                Issue deployment