Mark, To make sure that I understand what you're proposing, you want to add a property to LogAttribute that allows users to provide a custom logger name?
If that is indeed what you are suggesting then I think it's a great idea. That being said, in practice I rarely ever use LogAttribute and we even considered removing it from the codebase before we open sourced, because the Data Provenance provides a much better view of what's going on to debug your flows. I know you're pretty new to NiFi, so if you've not yet had a chance to play with the Provenance, you can see the section in the User Guide at http://nifi.apache.org/docs/nifi-docs/html/user-guide.html#data-provenance <http://nifi.apache.org/docs/nifi-docs/html/user-guide.html#data-provenance> If you're interested in updating the LogAttribute processor, though, we'd be happy to have that contribution added, as it does make the Processor more usable. Thanks -Mark > On Oct 31, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Mark Petronic <markpetro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From the code, it appears it cannot be done as the attribute logging > goes the same getLogger() instance as the normal nifi-app traces. Has > anyone considered making that configurable, maybe allowing you do > define a different logger name for LogAttribute then creating that > logger definition in log back conf allowing flexibility? I'm using > attribute logging heavily as I try to better learn/debug Nifi (it give > you a nice 'under the hood' view of the flow) and build up some flows > and feel it would be beneficial to be able to capture the LogAttribte > message by themselves for more clarity on what is happening. I would > not mind maybe trying to implement this feature as my first crack at > contributing to the project. Seems like a fairly easy one that would > allow me to "go through the motions" of a full pull request process > and iron out the process. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
