Java, a stalwart successful the programming planet, provides a constructed-successful logging mechanics: java.util.logging (JUL). Piece readily disposable, JUL frequently falls abbreviated of the strong capabilities supplied by 3rd-organization logging frameworks similar Log4j 2, SLF4j with Logback, and tinylog. This begs the motion: wherefore not usage java.util.logging? This station delves into the shortcomings of JUL and explores wherefore alternate logging options are mostly most popular by builders.

Show Considerations with java.util.logging

JUL tin beryllium a show bottleneck, particularly successful multi-threaded purposes. Its drawstring formatting, carried out equal once the log flat isn’t enabled, tin pb to pointless overhead. This impacts exertion responsiveness and assets utilization. Moreover, its default handlers, peculiarly the FileHandler, tin contend for record locks, additional degrading show.

Ideate a advanced-collection internet exertion utilizing JUL. All log communication, careless of its value, triggers drawstring formatting. This changeless processing consumes invaluable CPU cycles, possibly impacting person education. Furthermore, rivalry for record locks tin origin delays successful logging important accusation, hindering debugging and monitoring efforts.

See a script wherever aggregate threads effort to log messages concurrently utilizing JUL’s FileHandler. The rivalry for the record fastener tin make a bottleneck, slowing behind the logging procedure and possibly impacting the general show of the exertion. This highlights the demand for a much businesslike logging mechanics successful multi-threaded environments.

Constricted Configuration Choices and Flexibility

JUL’s configuration choices are comparatively constricted in contrast to its contemporary counter tops. XML configuration is cumbersome, and dynamic modifications are hard to instrumentality. This deficiency of flexibility restricts builders successful tailoring the logging behaviour to circumstantial exertion wants. Much precocious options similar filtering primarily based connected discourse oregon dynamically altering log ranges are difficult oregon intolerable to accomplish with JUL.

For case, filtering logs primarily based connected circumstantial petition IDs oregon person periods is hard with JUL. This limits its usefulness successful diagnosing points successful analyzable purposes wherever discourse is important. Contemporary logging frameworks message much granular power complete logging output, enabling builders to pinpoint points much efficaciously.

Moreover, JUL lacks the quality to easy control betwixt antithetic logging implementations with out modifying the exertion codification. This makes it difficult to accommodate to altering logging necessities oregon combine with present logging infrastructure. Contemporary logging frameworks similar SLF4j supply an abstraction bed that permits builders to swap logging implementations seamlessly.

Deficiency of Precocious Options

Contemporary logging frameworks message precocious options similar asynchronous logging, communication queuing, and assorted output codecs, together with JSON. These options heighten show, better logging throughput, and change integration with centralized logging techniques. JUL lacks these important capabilities, making it little appropriate for analyzable functions and microservices architectures.

Asynchronous logging, for illustration, tin importantly better exertion show by offloading logging duties to a abstracted thread. This prevents logging from blocking the chief exertion thread, making certain responsiveness equal nether dense burden. JUL’s synchronous quality makes it little businesslike successful show-delicate situations.

The quality to output logs successful structured codecs similar JSON is important for integration with contemporary monitoring and investigation instruments. JUL’s constricted output format choices brand it little appropriate for these usage instances.

Ecosystem and Assemblage Activity

The assemblage activity and ecosystem surrounding JUL are comparatively smaller than these of another logging frameworks. This interprets to less readily disposable assets, tutorials, and extensions. Uncovering options to analyzable logging issues tin beryllium much difficult, and integrating with another instruments and libraries mightiness necessitate customized improvement efforts.

The vibrant assemblage surrounding frameworks similar Log4j 2 and SLF4j ensures readily disposable activity, extended documentation, and a wealthiness of plugins for assorted integrations. This affluent ecosystem simplifies improvement and troubleshooting, making these frameworks a much charismatic prime for builders.

See a script wherever you demand to combine your logging scheme with a monitoring implement. With fashionable frameworks similar Log4j 2, you’re apt to discovery pre-constructed appenders and plugins that simplify the integration procedure. With JUL, you mightiness person to create customized options, expanding improvement clip and attempt.

JUL lacks asynchronous logging, impacting show.
Constricted output codecs hinder integration with contemporary instruments.

Measure your exertion’s logging wants.
Take a appropriate logging model (Log4j 2, SLF4j with Logback, tinylog).
Configure the model in accordance to your necessities.

“Businesslike logging is important for exertion monitoring and troubleshooting. Selecting the correct model tin importantly contact show and maintainability.” - [Hypothetical Adept Punctuation, Origin to beryllium added]

Featured Snippet: Wherefore is JUL frequently neglected? Its show limitations, deficiency of precocious options, and constricted configuration choices brand it little appropriate for contemporary purposes in contrast to alternate options similar Log4j 2 and SLF4j with Logback.

Larn much astir logging champion practices.Log4j 2

SLF4j

tinylog

[Infographic Placeholder: Evaluating JUL with another logging frameworks] FAQ: Communal Questions astir Logging successful Java

Q: Tin I usage JUL with SLF4j?

A: Sure, you tin usage an SLF4j span for JUL, however it’s frequently much businesslike to straight usage a much performant logging implementation.

Piece java.util.logging serves a basal intent, its drawbacks go evident once dealing with analyzable functions, advanced collection, oregon the demand for precocious logging capabilities. The show implications, deficiency of flexibility, and constricted characteristic fit brand alternate logging frameworks a much compelling prime for about Java initiatives. Embracing much sturdy options similar Log4j 2, SLF4j with Logback, oregon equal light-weight choices similar tinylog, empowers builders with amended power, show, and flexibility successful managing their exertion logs. Research these alternate options and find which champion fits your task’s wants for a much effectual and businesslike logging resolution. See components similar show necessities, scalability wants, and integration with your current infrastructure once making your determination. This considerate attack volition lend to a much strong and maintainable exertion successful the agelong tally.

See show wants and take the champion logging model.
Research logging champion practices for optimum implementation.

Question & Answer :
For the archetypal clip successful my beingness I discovery myself successful a assumption wherever I’m penning a Java API that volition beryllium unfastened sourced. Hopefully to beryllium included successful galore another tasks.

For logging I (and so the group I activity with) person ever utilized JUL (java.util.logging) and ne\’er had immoderate points with it. Nevertheless present I demand to realize successful much item what I ought to bash for my API improvement. I’ve executed any investigation connected this and with the accusation I’ve bought I conscionable acquire much confused. Therefore this station.

Since I travel from JUL I’m biased connected that. My cognition of the remainder is not that large.

From the investigation I’ve carried out I’ve travel ahead with these causes wherefore group bash not similar JUL:

“I began processing successful Java agelong earlier Star launched JUL and it was conscionable simpler for maine to proceed with logging-model-X instead than to larn thing fresh”. Hmm. I’m not kidding, this is really what group opportunity. With this statement we might each beryllium doing COBOL. (nevertheless I tin surely associate to this being a lazy dude myself)
“I don’t similar the names of the logging ranges successful JUL”. Fine, earnestly, this is conscionable not adequate of a ground to present a fresh dependency.
“I don’t similar the modular format of the output from JUL”. Hmm. This is conscionable configuration. You bash not equal person to bash thing codification-omniscient. (actual, backmost successful aged days you whitethorn person had to make your ain Formatter people to acquire it correct).
“I usage another libraries that besides usage logging-model-X truthful I idea it simpler conscionable to usage that 1”. This is a round statement, isn’t ? Wherefore does ‘all people’ usage logging-model-X and not JUL?
“Everyone other is utilizing logging-model-X”. This to maine is conscionable a particular lawsuit of the supra. Bulk is not ever correct.

Truthful the existent large motion is wherefore not JUL?. What is it I person missed ? The raison d’être for logging facades (SLF4J, JCL) is that aggregate logging implementations person existed traditionally and the ground for that truly goes backmost to the epoch earlier JUL arsenic I seat it. If JUL was clean past logging facades wouldn’t be, oregon what? To brand issues much complicated JUL is to any degree a facade itself, permitting Handlers, Formatters and equal the LogManager to beryllium swapped.

Instead than embracing aggregate methods of doing the aforesaid happening (logging), shouldn’t we motion wherefore they had been essential successful the archetypal spot? (and seat if these causes inactive be)

Fine, my investigation truthful cold has led to a mates of issues that I tin seat whitethorn beryllium existent points with JUL:

Show. Any opportunity that show successful SLF4J is superior to the remainder. This appears to maine to beryllium a lawsuit of untimely optimization. If you demand to log tons of of megabytes per 2nd past I’m not certain you are connected the correct way anyhow. JUL has besides developed and the checks you did connected Java 1.four whitethorn nary longer beryllium actual. You tin publication astir it present and this hole has made it into Java 7. Galore besides conversation astir the overhead of drawstring concatenation successful logging strategies. Nevertheless template based mostly logging avoids this outgo and it be besides successful JUL. Personally I ne\’er truly compose template based mostly logging. Excessively lazy for that. For illustration if I bash this with JUL:
```
log.most interesting("Lookup petition from username=" + username + ", valueX=" + valueX + ", valueY=" + valueY)); 
```
my IDE volition inform maine and inquire approval that it ought to alteration it to:
```
log.log(Flat.Most interesting, "Lookup petition from username={zero}, valueX={1}, valueY={2}", fresh Entity[]{username, valueX, valueY}); 
```
.. which I volition of class judge. Approval granted ! Convey you for your aid.

Truthful I don’t really compose specified statements myself, that is accomplished by the IDE.

Successful decision connected the content of show I haven’t recovered thing that would propose that JUL’s show is not fine in contrast to the contention.
Configuration from classpath. Retired-of-the-container JUL can not burden a configuration record from the classpath. It is a fewer traces of codification to brand it bash truthful. I tin seat wherefore this whitethorn beryllium annoying however the resolution is abbreviated and elemental.
Availability of output handlers. JUL comes with 5 output handlers retired-of-the-container: console, record watercourse, socket and representation. These tin beryllium prolonged oregon fresh ones tin beryllium written. This whitethorn for illustration beryllium penning to UNIX/Linux Syslog and Home windows Case Log. I person personally ne\’er had this demand nor person I seen it utilized however I tin surely associate to wherefore it whitethorn beryllium a utile characteristic. Logback comes with an appender for Syslog for illustration. Inactive I would reason that
1. ninety nine.5% of the wants for output locations are lined by what is successful JUL retired-of-the-container.
2. Particular wants might beryllium catered for by customized handlers connected apical of JUL instead than connected apical of thing other. Location’s thing to maine that suggests that it takes much clip to compose a Syslog output handler for JUL than it does for different logging model.

I’m truly afraid that location’s thing I’ve missed. The usage of logging facades and logging implementations another than JUL is truthful general that I person to travel to the decision that it’s maine who conscionable doesn’t realize. That wouldn’t beryllium the archetypal clip, I’m acrophobic. :-)

Truthful what ought to I bash with my API? I privation it to go palmy. I tin of class conscionable “spell with the travel” and instrumentality SLF4J (which appears the about fashionable these days) however for my ain interest I inactive demand to realize precisely what is incorrect with the JUL of present that warrants each the fuzz? Volition I sabotage myself by selecting JUL for my room ?

Investigating show

(conception added by nolan600 connected 07-JUL-2012)

Location’s a mention beneath from Ceki astir SLF4J’s parametrization being 10 instances oregon much quicker than JUL’s. Truthful I’ve began doing any elemental exams. Astatine archetypal glimpse the assertion is surely accurate. Present are the preliminary outcomes (however publication connected!):

Execution clip SLF4J, backend Logback: 1515
Execution clip SLF4J, backend JUL: 12938
Execution clip JUL: 16911

The numbers supra are msecs truthful little is amended. Truthful 10 instances show quality is by archetypal really beautiful adjacent. My first opposition: That is a batch !

Present is the center of the trial. Arsenic tin beryllium seen an integer and a drawstring is construted successful a loop which is past utilized successful the log message:

for (int i = zero; i < noOfExecutions; i++) { for (char x=32; x<88; x++) { Drawstring someString = Quality.toString(x); // present we log } }

(I needed the log message to person some a primitive information kind (successful this lawsuit an int) and a much analyzable information kind (successful this lawsuit a Drawstring). Not certain it issues however location you person it.)

The log message for SLF4J:

logger.data("Logging {} and {} ", i, someString);

The log message for JUL:

logger.log(Flat.Data, "Logging {zero} and {1}", fresh Entity[]{i, someString});

The JVM was ‘warmed ahead’ with the aforesaid trial executed erstwhile earlier the existent measure was finished. Java 1.7.03 was utilized connected Home windows 7. Newest variations of SLF4J (v1.6.6) and Logback (v1.zero.6) was utilized. Stdout and stderr was redirected to null instrumentality.

Nevertheless, cautious present, it turns retired JUL is spending about of its clip successful getSourceClassName() due to the fact that JUL by default prints the origin people sanction successful the output, piece Logback doesn’t. Truthful we are evaluating apples and oranges. I person to bash the trial once more and configure the logging implementations successful a akin mode truthful that they really output the aforesaid material. I bash nevertheless fishy that SLF4J+Logback volition inactive travel retired connected apical however cold from the first numbers arsenic fixed supra. Act tuned.

Btw: The trial was archetypal clip I’ve really labored with SLF4J oregon Logback. A nice education. JUL is surely a batch little welcoming once you are beginning retired.

Investigating show (portion 2)

(conception added by nolan600 connected 08-JUL-2012)

Arsenic it turns retired it doesn’t truly substance for show however you configure your form successful JUL, i.e. whether or not oregon not it consists of the origin sanction oregon not. I tried with a precise elemental form:

java.util.logging.SimpleFormatter.format="%four$s: %5$s [%1$tc]%n"

and that did not alteration the supra timings astatine each. My profiler revealed that the logger inactive spent a batch of clip successful calls to getSourceClassName() equal if this was not portion of my form. The form doesn’t substance.

I’m so concluding connected the content of show that astatine slightest for the examined template based mostly log message location appears to beryllium approximately a cause of 10 successful existent show quality betwixt JUL (dilatory) and SLF4J+Logback (speedy). Conscionable similar Ceki mentioned.

I tin besides seat different happening particularly that SLF4J’s getLogger() call is a batch much costly than JUL’s ditto. (ninety five sclerosis vs zero.three sclerosis if my profiler is close). This makes awareness. SLF4J has to bash any clip connected the binding of the underlying logging implementation. This doesn’t scare maine. These calls ought to beryllium slightly uncommon successful the life of an exertion. The fastness ought to beryllium successful the existent log calls.

Last decision

(conception added by peterh connected 08-JUL-2012)

Convey you for each your solutions. Opposite to what I initially idea I’ve ended ahead deciding to usage SLF4J for my API. This is primarily based connected a figure of issues and your enter:

It offers flexibility to take log implementation astatine deployment clip.
Points with deficiency of flexibility of JUL’s configuration once tally wrong an exertion server.
SLF4J is surely a batch sooner arsenic elaborate supra successful peculiar if you mates it with Logback. Equal if this was conscionable a unsmooth trial I person ground to accept that a batch much attempt has gone into optimization connected SLF4J+Logback than connected JUL.
Documentation. The documentation for SLF4J is merely a batch much blanket and exact.
Form flexibility. Arsenic I did the checks I fit retired to person JUL mimic the default form from Logback. This form consists of the sanction of the thread. It turns retired JUL can not bash this retired of the container. Fine, I haven’t missed it till present, however I don’t deliberation it is a happening that ought to beryllium lacking from a log model. Play!
About (oregon galore) Java initiatives present usage Maven truthful including a dependency is not that large a happening particularly if that dependency is instead unchangeable, i.e. doesn’t perpetually alteration its API. This appears to beryllium actual for SLF4J. Besides the SLF4J jar and pals are tiny successful measurement.

Truthful the unusual happening that occurred was that I really bought rather upset with JUL last having labored a spot with SLF4J. I inactive remorse that it has to beryllium this manner with JUL. JUL is cold from clean however benignant of does the occupation. Conscionable not rather fine adequate. The aforesaid tin beryllium stated astir Properties arsenic an illustration however we bash not deliberation astir abstracting that truthful group tin plug successful their ain configuration room and what person you. I deliberation the ground is that Properties comes successful conscionable supra the barroom piece the other is actual for JUL of present … and successful the ancient it got here successful astatine zero due to the fact that it didn’t be.

Last-last decision (possibly)

(conception added by peterh connected 02-OCT-2022)

Java 9 launched the Scheme.Logger which is supposed arsenic a facade to logging implementations. Therefore, arsenic cold arsenic I tin archer, it competes with SLF4J, however has the vantage that it is included with the JDK. Truthful possibly room builders ought to usage Scheme.Logger instead than SLF4J ?

I discovery this weblog station by Renato Athaydes to explicate it rather fine. (btw: the bug successful the Log4j-v2 span talked about by Renato appears to person been mounted with v2.thirteen.2 of Log4j v2)

Disclaimer: I americium the laminitis of log4j, SLF4J and logback initiatives.

Location are nonsubjective causes for preferring SLF4J. For 1, SLF4J permits the extremity-person the liberty to take the underlying logging model. Successful summation, savvier customers lean to like logback which affords capabilities past log4j, with j.u.l falling manner down. Characteristic-omniscient j.u.l whitethorn beryllium adequate for any customers however for galore others it conscionable isn’t. Successful a nutshell, if logging is crucial to you, you would privation to usage SLF4J with logback arsenic the underlying implementation. If logging is unimportant, j.u.l is good.

Nevertheless, arsenic an oss developer, you demand to return into relationship the preferences of your customers and not conscionable your ain. It follows that you ought to follow SLF4J not due to the fact that you are satisfied that SLF4J is amended than j.u.l however due to the fact that about Java builders presently (July 2012) like SLF4J arsenic their logging API. If finally you determine not to attention astir fashionable sentiment, see the pursuing details:

these who like j.u.l bash truthful retired of comfort due to the fact that j.u.l is bundled with the JDK. To my cognition location are nary another nonsubjective arguments successful favour of j.u.l.
your ain penchant for j.u.l is conscionable that, a penchant.

Frankincense, holding “difficult info” supra national sentiment, piece seemingly courageous, is a logical fallacy successful this lawsuit.

If inactive not satisfied, JB Nizet makes an further and potent statement:

But the extremity person may person already performed this customization for his ain codification, oregon different room that makes use of log4j oregon logback. j.u.l is extensible, however having to widen logback, j.u.l, log4j and Deity lone is aware of which another logging model due to the fact that helium makes use of 4 libraries that usage 4 antithetic logging frameworks is cumbersome. By utilizing SLF4J, you let him to configure the logging frameworks helium desires, not the 1 you person chosen. Retrieve that a emblematic task makes use of myriads of libraries, and not conscionable yours.

If for any ground you hatred the SLF4J API and utilizing it volition snuff the amusive retired of your activity, past by each means spell for j.u.l. Last each, location are means to redirect j.u.l to SLF4J.

By the manner, j.u.l parametrization is astatine slightest 10 occasions slower than SLF4J’s which ends ahead making a noticeable quality.

Why not use javautillogging