System Design Logging Framework | Implementing Logger | System Design Interview Low Level| logging 

Don't you think this will print multiple levels if you log debug? we only need one logger

Hope content was helpful. Do like the videos and subscribe and share with others 🙂

Glad it was helpful. Do like and subscribe and share with others 🙂

Glad it was helpful. Do like and subscribe and share with others 🙂

Glad it was helpful. Do like and subscribe and share with others 🙂

Do like, subscribe and share with others

Hope it was helpful. Do like and subscribe and share with others 🙂

COR fits nicely here actually. For configuration part, we can maintain a threshold value that the user can configure and add a check for this before printing(perhaps the abstractlogger)

I also agree. Not sure why we need chaining here? we only need to log one level at time

I answered the same in one of my interview, but interviewer restricted his expectations to chain of responsibility pattern & I never understood why.

@@bhawanasahu3000 let's take example of log4j, we can enable certain log level in the system like ERROR or INFO etc, this is how the error levels are defined ALL < DEBUG < INFO < WARN < ERROR < FATAL < OFF e.g. if log level is set to warn, then only warn, error, fatal will be printed, rest all logs with other log levels will be disabled like debug, info etc will not be printed Now you can see that chain of responsibility comes in handy here, lets say I have used warn as log level in log 4j and in code i have different logs like debug, info, error etc lets take error, it will go to all handlers and check what log level is enabled e.g. it will first go to debug handler, is it enabled, no, then go to next info and next warn, okay warn is enabled but the log level to be printed is error, then it will move to next handler i.e. error okay now it matches the log level to be printed and also at the system level warn is enabled and error handler is eligible for printing this log There is a order of execution here where the request may or may not be fulfilled based on what log level is enabled and the order which the request should be served is defined by the chain of responsibility pattern i.e. ALL < DEBUG < INFO < WARN < ERROR < FATAL < OFF

Yes, absolutely.If the root level is ERROR, we expect it to display log.info() and log.error() statements only in actual logging framework.This can be easily handled by individual loggers by comparing their actual levels with root level.There is never a delegation needed.

Yes, I also think the same why do we need a chain of responsibility here? does anyone get a solution?