Jerome Dochez wrote:
> Thanks Lloyd, This would be a good start.
>
> However I think this is not enough. I have to agree with the Cay
> Horstman that seeing a stack trace is not very friendly and has very
> little added value to the developer (unless generated by the developer
> code which we can detect in all cases).
>
> I remember Ludo already complaining (...:)...) about that in 8.1 and
> Ken Saks pointed out that it was an important debugging tool for us
> when developer forward issues or application server potential bugs. I
> agree this is a valid concern.
>
> So I am wondering if we should not change our logging strategy to log
> exceptions in a separate file (exceptions.log). In the server.log, we
> should only see the exception.getMessage() with a ID that could be
> used to cross reference in the exceptions.log. That way, usual
> developers would not have to dig through exceptions logs in the
> server.log to get an idea of what went wrong. When necessary, we can
> use the exceptions.log when debugging problems.
>
> KenS, Jan, Ludo (impact on Netbeans ?), others... feedback ?
>
> Jerome
>
I like the idea of a dual log file, one for the normal user, and one for
getting the extra stack trace(s), when needed (which by the way might
still not be enough, given my experience on previous log files where
sometimes, even the module owner or module guru cannot not figure out
what's going on without asking further questions to customers :-))
The perf impact is not a big deal since it happens only we we have
runtime error.
A little impact on netbeans, but as well as admin gui log viewer and log
rotation strategy (do we rotate the 2 files at the same time?)
No big deal I guess...
Ludo