Feature request - Unreliable logging

[ch...@jumis.com]

This is going to sound a little silly but, I'd like to be able to flip a flag or instantiate a journal which is just in RAM. Lossy, essentially.

Now, of course I can just go ahead and use a List or buffer in these cases. But I'd prefer to not to change the code paths I have written. It'd mean a scattering of if statements each place I currently have a call to journal.

If I could go ahead and say, use up to X MB of RAM, after that, throw an error (or circular buffer, whatever works for implementation), it'd give me a little flexibility for some of the cases I'm using journal.

-Charles

[Sergio Bossa]

Hi Charles,

this _could_ be done by enabling a "no persistence" switch and using
the max batch size as a threshold for how many writes to keep before
either deleting them or erroring out: would that work for you?

Also, may I ask why you'd need it? Is it for performance reasons, or
because you can't write to disk at all?

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Journal.IO" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to journalio+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



--
Sergio Bossa
http://www.linkedin.com/in/sergiob

[ch...@jumis.com]

That would work -- is there already a no persistence switch in the project?

It's to ensure some users that the project won't write to disk -- thus will not affect disk performance nor under any circumstance "fill up" a partition with log data.

That's only for users that don't actually need the persistence. In most cases, we want the reliability.

-Charles

[Sergio Bossa]

On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:24 PM, <ch...@jumis.com> wrote:

> That would work -- is there already a no persistence switch in the project?

There's no such thing as of now: could you open a new issue in our
github issue tracker?
Thanks!