On Mon, 19 May 2025 18:05:39 GMT, Michael Strauß <mstra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> 100 still looks excessive to me - it's unlikely that we'll have two >> different scenarios when this happens, so most of the time the log will have >> 100 identical traces. >> >> I mean, one is probably enough, we could have 2 or 4 just to drive the >> message home. Anything beyond 8 is simply annoying, don't you think? > > In general, we shouldn't suppress any exceptions that would otherwise be > logged. The only thing that makes this case a bit different is that with a > periodic timer, there's the potential for an inflated log that grows without > bounds. I think that defining a reasonable upper limit is enough to prevent > that; in particular, I think we shouldn't try to assume that any particular > number of logged failures (like 1 or 4) is "enough" for application > developers. well, I still think it's way too high of a number, but the expectation is that once the dev sees a 100 traces in the log they'll fix it right away. And if some company finds that all of a sudden their client logs exploded in size, they should have invested more in QA. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1811#discussion_r2096266254
