log

Pros of Logrus

• More feature-rich with extensive logging options and customization
• Supports structured logging with fields for better organization
• Has a larger community and ecosystem of hooks and formatters

Cons of Logrus

• Heavier and potentially slower due to more features
• No longer actively maintained (in maintenance mode)
• More complex API compared to Log's simpler interface

Code Comparison

Log:

log.WithFields(log.Fields{
    "user": "john",
    "id":   123,
}).Info("User logged in")

Logrus:

logrus.WithFields(logrus.Fields{
    "user": "john",
    "id":   123,
}).Info("User logged in")

Summary

Log is a lightweight, performant logging library with a simple API, while Logrus offers more features and structured logging capabilities. Log is actively maintained and focuses on simplicity, whereas Logrus is feature-rich but in maintenance mode. Both libraries provide similar basic functionality, but Logrus offers more advanced options at the cost of increased complexity and potential performance overhead.

Pros of zerolog

• Higher performance and lower allocation overhead
• Supports structured logging out of the box
• More flexible and customizable logging options

Cons of zerolog

• Steeper learning curve due to more complex API
• Less idiomatic Go syntax compared to apex/log
• Requires more setup for basic usage

Code Comparison

zerolog:

logger := zerolog.New(os.Stdout).With().Timestamp().Logger()
logger.Info().Str("key", "value").Msg("Hello, World!")

apex/log:

log.SetHandler(text.New(os.Stdout))
log.WithField("key", "value").Info("Hello, World!")

Both libraries offer structured logging capabilities, but zerolog uses a more fluent interface for adding fields. apex/log follows a more traditional logging pattern, which may be more familiar to developers coming from other logging libraries.

zerolog's approach allows for better performance and lower allocations, but it may require more effort to set up and use effectively. apex/log provides a simpler API that's easier to get started with, but it may not offer the same level of performance or flexibility as zerolog.

Ultimately, the choice between these libraries depends on your specific requirements for performance, ease of use, and logging features.

Pros of zap

• Significantly faster performance and lower allocation overhead
• More flexible and customizable logging options
• Better support for structured logging and field-based logging

Cons of zap

• Steeper learning curve and more complex API
• Requires more setup and configuration for basic use cases

Code Comparison

zap:

logger, _ := zap.NewProduction()
defer logger.Sync()
logger.Info("Failed to fetch URL",
    zap.String("url", url),
    zap.Int("attempt", attempt),
    zap.Duration("backoff", backoff),
)

log:

log.WithFields(log.Fields{
    "url": url,
    "attempt": attempt,
    "backoff": backoff,
}).Info("Failed to fetch URL")

Summary

zap offers superior performance and more advanced features, making it suitable for high-performance applications with complex logging requirements. However, it comes with a steeper learning curve and more setup overhead.

log provides a simpler, more straightforward API that's easier to get started with, but may not be as performant or flexible for advanced use cases.

The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of your project, balancing simplicity and ease of use against performance and advanced features.

Pros of log15

• More flexible logging levels with custom severity ordering
• Built-in support for structured logging with key-value pairs
• Extensive customization options for log formatting and output

Cons of log15

• Slightly more complex API compared to apex/log
• Less active maintenance and updates in recent years
• Potentially higher memory usage due to more features

Code Comparison

log15:

log := log15.New("module", "app/server")
log.Info("server starting", "listen", ":8080")

apex/log:

log.WithFields(log.Fields{
    "module": "app/server",
}).Info("server starting")

Both libraries offer structured logging, but log15 provides a more concise syntax for adding context to log entries. apex/log uses a chained method approach, while log15 allows passing key-value pairs directly to the logging methods.

log15 offers more flexibility in terms of log levels and formatting, making it suitable for complex logging requirements. However, apex/log provides a simpler API and is more actively maintained, which may be preferable for projects with straightforward logging needs.

Consider your project's specific requirements, such as performance, customization needs, and long-term maintenance when choosing between these logging libraries.

Pros of Lumberjack

• Simple and focused on log rotation and management
• Supports log file size limits and automatic rotation
• Lightweight with minimal dependencies

Cons of Lumberjack

• Limited built-in formatting options
• Lacks advanced features like structured logging or log levels
• No built-in support for different output destinations (e.g., console, network)

Code Comparison

Lumberjack:

log := lumberjack.Logger{
    Filename:   "/var/log/myapp/foo.log",
    MaxSize:    500, // megabytes
    MaxBackups: 3,
    MaxAge:     28, // days
    Compress:   true, // disabled by default
}

Apex/log:

log.SetHandler(cli.New(os.Stderr))
log.WithFields(log.Fields{
    "user": "jsmith",
    "id":   "123",
}).Info("user logged in")

Lumberjack focuses on log file management and rotation, while Apex/log provides a more comprehensive logging solution with structured logging, multiple output handlers, and log levels. Lumberjack is ideal for applications that primarily need file-based logging with rotation, whereas Apex/log offers more flexibility and features for complex logging requirements.