Logging | Removing line break in stack trace
All Submissions:
- [YES/NO] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it? YES
- [YES/NO] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
- [YES/NO/NA] I have added tests to cover my changes.
- [YES/NO/NA] All new and existing tests passed.
- [YES/NO/NA] My code follows the code style of this project.
- [YES/NO/NA] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission.
What is the issue or story related to the change?
Issue: Exception in stack trace is split across multiple lines causing too many logs.
Bug 6422: https://dev.azure.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/Open%20Energy%20Platform/_workitems/edit/6422
Impact: This issue is resulting in too many logs. Also impacts DRI's troubleshooting.
Target: Remove extra line or new line in exceptions so as to have more manageable logs.
log4j2.xml updated to remove new line character and add pipe separator instead. Code update: Original line 35 of log4j2.xml: <PatternLayout pattern="%d{yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS} %5p ${hostName} --- [%15.15t] %-40.40c{1.} correlation-id=%X{correlation-id} data-partition-id=%X{data-partition-id} api-method=%X{api-method} operation-name=%X{operation-name} user-id=%X{user-id} app-id=%X{app-id}:%m%replace{%m}{[\r\n]}{|} %throwable{separator(|)}%n />
Updated line 35 of log4j2.xml:
<PatternLayout pattern="%d{yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS} %5p ${hostName} --- [%15.15t] %-40.40c{1.} correlation-id=%X{correlation-id} data-partition-id=%X{data-partition-id} api-method=%X{api-method} operation-name=%X{operation-name} user-id=%X{user-id} app-id=%X{app-id}:%m%replace{%m}{[\r\n]}{|} %throwable{separator(|)}%n />
High level design: Issue: Exception in stack trace is split across multiple lines causing too many logs. https://dev.azure.com/OpenEnergyPlatform/Open%20Energy%20Platform/_workitems/edit/6422
Test coverage:
- We tested the generated logs in IntelliJ Console and saw that the new lines are removed, and log size reduced.
- We tested on Kusto and Kusto is also not showing new lines.
Does this introduce a breaking change?
- NO
Pending items
Reviewer request
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR -- Coding design: <Reviewer1> -- Backward Compatibility: <Reviewer2> -- Feature Logic: <Logic design> -- <Any other context mention here> OR -- <Component 1>: <Reviewer1> -- <CosmosDB>: <Reviewer2> -- <ServiceBus> <Reviewer3> -- <Mention any other component and owner>