-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[SPARK-51367][BUILD] Upgrade slf4j to 2.0.17 #50115
Closed
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dongjoon-hyun
approved these changes
Mar 4, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1, LGTM. Thank you, @LuciferYang .
Merged to master.
Thank you @dongjoon-hyun |
Pajaraja
pushed a commit
to Pajaraja/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2025
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This pr aims to upgrade slf4j from 2.0.16 to 2.0.17. ### Why are the changes needed? The new version brings some bug fixes, like: - As reported in qos-ch/slf4j#450, in some rare cases where MDC could be initialized before LoggerFactory. Thus, MDC would be stuck using the wrong MDCAdapter instance. To fix this issue LoggerFactory and MDC have been modified. Implementations of SLF4JServiceProvider are encouraged to initialize their mdcAdapter and markerFactory fields as early as possible, preferably at construction time. Note that these changes are transparent to existing logging backends which will continue to work as is. - Fixed incorrect interpretation of Level.OFF and Level.ALL in SLF4JPlatformLogger by mapping Level.OFF as Level.ERROR and Level.ALL as Level.TRACE. This issue was reported in qos-ch/slf4j#430 by Peter Halicky. The full release notes as follows: - https://github.com/qos-ch/slf4j/releases/tag/v_2.0.17 ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Pass GitHub Actions ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#50115 from LuciferYang/slf4j-2.0.17. Lead-authored-by: yangjie01 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: YangJie <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
anoopj
pushed a commit
to anoopj/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2025
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This pr aims to upgrade slf4j from 2.0.16 to 2.0.17. ### Why are the changes needed? The new version brings some bug fixes, like: - As reported in qos-ch/slf4j#450, in some rare cases where MDC could be initialized before LoggerFactory. Thus, MDC would be stuck using the wrong MDCAdapter instance. To fix this issue LoggerFactory and MDC have been modified. Implementations of SLF4JServiceProvider are encouraged to initialize their mdcAdapter and markerFactory fields as early as possible, preferably at construction time. Note that these changes are transparent to existing logging backends which will continue to work as is. - Fixed incorrect interpretation of Level.OFF and Level.ALL in SLF4JPlatformLogger by mapping Level.OFF as Level.ERROR and Level.ALL as Level.TRACE. This issue was reported in qos-ch/slf4j#430 by Peter Halicky. The full release notes as follows: - https://github.com/qos-ch/slf4j/releases/tag/v_2.0.17 ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? Pass GitHub Actions ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#50115 from LuciferYang/slf4j-2.0.17. Lead-authored-by: yangjie01 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: YangJie <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This pr aims to upgrade slf4j from 2.0.16 to 2.0.17.
Why are the changes needed?
The new version brings some bug fixes, like:
As reported in Logging framework uses MDC adapter provided by SubstituteServiceProvider even after initialization of CustomServiceProvider qos-ch/slf4j#450, in some rare cases where MDC could be initialized before LoggerFactory. Thus, MDC would be stuck using the wrong MDCAdapter instance. To fix this issue LoggerFactory and MDC have been modified. Implementations of SLF4JServiceProvider are encouraged to initialize their mdcAdapter and markerFactory fields as early as possible, preferably at construction time. Note that these changes are transparent to existing logging backends which will continue to work as is.
Fixed incorrect interpretation of Level.OFF and Level.ALL in SLF4JPlatformLogger by mapping Level.OFF as Level.ERROR and Level.ALL as Level.TRACE. This issue was reported in slf4j-jdk-platform-logging always logging Level.ALL messages regardless of logger level qos-ch/slf4j#430 by Peter Halicky.
The full release notes as follows:
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Pass GitHub Actions
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No