Re: [boost] Logging library

From: John Torjo (john.groups_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-01 05:52:40

> But the most important thing here is that it is flexible (you can create
> your own appenders, formatters, etc and register them with the system and
> they will act as if they were built in) and FAST.  Plus it is configurable
>   
It certainly is extensible - quite a lot ;)
> with boost::property_tree (which makes it easier for end-users to use).
>
> Anyway, my code might be worth a look - but coming back to my initial question
> have you done speed benchmarks?  Or thought about not using streams?
>
>   
I haven't done speed benchmarks yet, but as a side-note, I want to 
create a class that will benchmark how long the app spends doing logging.
Also, if you turn "compile fast" mode off, you'll avoid one virtual call.

About using streams - this is really your call. It's all about gathering 
your data:
http://torjo.com/log2/doc/html/workflow.html
http://torjo.com/log2/doc/html/workflow.html#workflow_2a

So gathering can happen using streams, or you can choose your own Log 
Syntax, avoiding streams.

Note that logging can also become way faster if you do it on a dedicated 
thread (on_dedicated_thread.hpp class).
I haven't yet tested this, but it's gonna be way faster than doing 
logging on the thread the message is logged. Basically, the only thing 
that happens in the current thread is gathering the message. Writing it 
(formatting it and then writing it to the destination(s)) will happen on 
the other thread.
Thus, any destination you might have - can automatically become 
asynchronous as well ;) )

(note : your appenders = my destinations)

I'd be curious to see how my lib benchmarks against what solution your 
company took ;)

Best,
John
> Preston
>
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:57:10 +0300, John Torjo wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi Jurko,
>>     
>>>> He he  ;)  Please take a look at :
>>>> http://torjo.com/log2/doc/html/
>>>>
>>>> I'm really interested in your feedback !
>>>>     
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>    Actually we have looked at your library. It looks very promising and
>>> we event closely followed its original boost review. It does seem to
>>> have what we need (according to the docs and related posts on this
>>> list) but for now we chose not to use it only because you seemed to
>>> have stopped developing it for a while and no one took over as an
>>> active developer.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Note that I've developed v2 from scratch, taking into account the
>> feedback from the first version. So this one is waaay more flexible ;)
>>
>> Best,
>> John
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>   

-- 
http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert
... call me only if you want things done right