lib: added logger api in node core by mertcanaltin · Pull Request #60468 · nodejs/node

mertcanaltin · 2025-10-28T19:09:56Z

Description

Adds an experimental node:logger module that provides a structured, high-performance logging API for Node.js. Available behind the --experimental-logger flag.

Refs: #49296

Architecture

Uses diagnostics_channel as the dispatch mechanism, loggers publish log records to level-specific channels, consumers subscribe to receive them
Pre-serializes bindings at construction time to avoid per-log overhead
Disabled log levels become noop functions, eliminating runtime level checks
JSON output uses the existing internal Utf8Stream (SonicBoom port) for high-throughput writes

API Surface

Logger, Producer class with trace, debug, info, warn, error, fatal methods
LogConsumer, Base consumer class for custom log handling
JSONConsumer, Built-in consumer that outputs structured JSON via Utf8Stream
child(bindings, options), Child loggers with inherited context and serializers
logger.<level>.enabled, Getter for conditional logging (typo-safe)
stdSerializers, Built-in serializers for err, req, res
serialize symbol, Symbol.for('nodejs.logger.serialize'), custom object serialization hook (stacked with field serializers)

Log levels follow RFC 5424 numerical ordering internally (trace: 10, debug: 20, info: 30, warn: 40, error: 50, fatal: 60). The API accepts string level names. diagnostics_channel channel names (log:trace, log:debug, log:info, log:warn, log:error, log:fatal) are used internally and can be subscribed to directly via diagnostics_channel if needed.

Performance

Benchmarked against Pino (output to /dev/null, n=100000):

Scenario	node:logger	pino	Difference
simple	6.06M ops/s	3.48M ops/s	+74%
child	5.76M ops/s	4.41M ops/s	+31%
disabled	174M ops/s	146M ops/s	+19%
fields	2.13M ops/s	1.36M ops/s	+56%

New files

lib/logger.js, Main module (Logger, LogConsumer, JSONConsumer)
lib/internal/logger/serializers.js, Standard err/req/res serializers
doc/api/logger.md, Full API documentation
benchmark/logger/basic-json.js, Benchmarks
test/parallel/test-log-basic.js, Core logger tests
test/parallel/test-logger-serializers.js, Serializer tests

Modified files

src/node_options.h / src/node_options.cc, --experimental-logger flag
lib/internal/process/pre_execution.js, setupLogger() to allow module loading when flag is set
lib/internal/bootstrap/realm.js, Module registration
doc/api/cli.md, Flag documentation
doc/api/index.md / doc/node.1, Index updates
test/parallel/test-code-cache.js / test-process-get-builtin.mjs / test-require-resolve.js, Test adjustments for new module

nodejs-github-bot · 2025-10-28T19:10:01Z

Review requested:

@nodejs/performance

mertcanaltin · 2025-10-29T19:25:12Z

thats my first performance results:

I think need improvement for child logger area, but ı'm so happy because other results it looks nice.
cc @mcollina @Qard @trentm @jsumners

node:logger vs pino

➜ node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗ ./node benchmark/logger/vs-pino.js n=100000
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 5,240,540.823813018
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 2,635,847.7027229806
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 159,436,487.67795104
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 3,619,336.304205216
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="pino" n=100000: 3,398,489.9761368227
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="pino" n=100000: 4,489,799.803418606
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="pino" n=100000: 119,772,384.56038144
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="pino" n=100000: 1,257,930.8609750536

mertcanaltin · 2025-10-29T22:14:10Z

I now learn this feat in Pino

pinojs/pino#2281

I will try add in node:logger

mcollina · 2025-10-30T08:49:22Z

This will require support for serializers

mertcanaltin · 2025-10-30T10:58:34Z

This will require support for serializers

I wonder, should we name them like Pino does (built-in serializers), or go with something like standardSerializers ?

mcollina · 2025-11-08T10:30:09Z

This will require support for serializers

I wonder, should we name them like Pino does (built-in serializers), or go with something like standardSerializers ?

Follow pino and we’ll change it

mertcanaltin · 2025-11-10T13:29:32Z

This will require support for serializers

I wonder, should we name them like Pino does (built-in serializers), or go with something like standardSerializers ?

Follow pino and we’ll change it

I tryed serializer implement for logger, and some bench result repaired

and fields and simple are experiencing a decline; I will try to resolve these

fields: 3.62M → 2.16M (-40%)
simple: 5.24M → 4.87M (-7%)

previously, the results for the child logger were quite slow at around 70%, but the new results have dropped to 18% and have actually improved significantly.

I continue to try new methods.

➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗ ./node benchmark/logger/vs-pino.js n=100000
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 4,868,164.032787085
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 3,894,327.425314102
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 160,503,080.85663706
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 2,157,462.3927336666
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="pino" n=100000: 3,424,706.4418693925
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="pino" n=100000: 4,753,595.477010947
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="pino" n=100000: 122,100,122.10012211
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="pino" n=100000: 1,411,215.99189962
➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗

mertcanaltin · 2025-11-10T14:12:02Z

This will require support for serializers

I wonder, should we name them like Pino does (built-in serializers), or go with something like standardSerializers ?

Follow pino and we’ll change it

I tryed serializer implement for logger, and some bench result repaired

and fields and simple are experiencing a decline; I will try to resolve these

fields: 3.62M → 2.16M (-40%) simple: 5.24M → 4.87M (-7%)

previously, the results for the child logger were quite slow at around 70%, but the new results have dropped to 18% and have actually improved significantly.

I continue to try new methods.
➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗ ./node benchmark/logger/vs-pino.js n=100000
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 4,868,164.032787085
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 3,894,327.425314102
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 160,503,080.85663706
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 2,157,462.3927336666
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="pino" n=100000: 3,424,706.4418693925
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="pino" n=100000: 4,753,595.477010947
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="pino" n=100000: 122,100,122.10012211
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="pino" n=100000: 1,411,215.99189962
➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗ 

I inspected pino and I learn some patterns, than I applied this commit and new results! 1ededc7

I used this patterns

removed the cost of serializing bindings in each log for the child logger,
skipped unnecessary serializer checks,
used direct string concatenation instead of object merging,
sped up type checking

simple: 6.06M vs 3.48M ops/s (+74% faster)
child: 5.76M vs 4.41M ops/s (+31% faster)
disabled: 174M vs 146M ops/s (+19% faster)
fields: 2.13M vs 1.36M ops/s (+56% faster)

➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗ ./node benchmark/logger/vs-pino.js n=100000
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 6,062,182.962986493
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 5,758,903.394222795
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 174,026,539.04720467
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="node-logger" n=100000: 2,126,059.37552321
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="simple" logger="pino" n=100000: 3,477,918.037575009
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="child" logger="pino" n=100000: 4,407,389.658686015
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="disabled" logger="pino" n=100000: 145,551,509.22359914
logger/vs-pino.js scenario="fields" logger="pino" n=100000: 1,363,125.197883181
➜  node git:(mert/create-logger-api/node-core) ✗

mertcanaltin · 2025-11-20T21:38:11Z

hello @mcollina do you any comments or suggestions for this end commits, I'm curious 🙏 .

codecov · 2025-11-29T16:46:57Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.93023% with 28 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.64%. Comparing base (adeb14a) to head (f2d9074).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
lib/logger.js	95.84%	23 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
lib/internal/logger/serializers.js	95.83%	4 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #60468      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.68%   89.64%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         706      708       +2     
  Lines      218222   219823    +1601     
  Branches    41768    42092     +324     
==========================================
+ Hits       195717   197062    +1345     
- Misses      14423    14641     +218     
- Partials     8082     8120      +38

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
lib/internal/bootstrap/realm.js	`96.22% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)`	⬆️
lib/internal/process/pre_execution.js	`98.15% <100.00%> (-0.23%)`	⬇️
src/node_options.cc	`76.63% <100.00%> (+0.02%)`	⬆️
src/node_options.h	`98.00% <100.00%> (+0.01%)`	⬆️
lib/internal/logger/serializers.js	`95.83% <95.83%> (ø)`
lib/logger.js	`95.84% <95.84%> (ø)`

... and 42 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

mertcanaltin · 2026-04-15T05:30:20Z

Hello everyone, I pushed a small follow-up, moved the hasSubscribers check before input validation so disabled consumers skip parsing (the original intent from @atlowChemi / @Qard).

Plus a few doc bits:
Error exception note in the JSON section, log channel names under LogConsumer and in
diagnostics_channel.md, and a Stability 1.1 marker on logger.child()

@RafaelGSS this round also covers your remaining points (channel names + Stability 1.1 on child), mind taking another look when you get a chance?

Thanks again for all the reviews.

Co-authored-by: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>

mertcanaltin · 2026-04-15T09:19:00Z

https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/24440675298/job/71405021240?pr=60468
https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/24440675298/job/71405021236?pr=60468

I looked this error, I guess sometimes this is a flaky test, I continue inspecting

#53579

mertcanaltin · 2026-04-15T16:18:42Z

Hello again I try this two test in my linux machine and get a passed

mert@lima-default:/Users/mert/Desktop/enjoy/linux-node/node$ out/Release/node test/parallel/test-snapshot-reproducible.js
mert@lima-default:/Users/mert/Desktop/enjoy/linux-node/node$

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:36:57Z

+    // Add consumer fields
+    const consumerFields = this.#fields;
+    for (const key of ObjectKeys(consumerFields)) {
+      json += `,${JSONStringify(key)}:${JSONStringify(consumerFields[key])}`;


We need a if check to ensure consumerFIelds[key] is not undefined, otherwise will produce invalid JSON.

And same question as the other, what we do when fields has keys conflicting with other fields?

Fixed, skipping undefined in handle() too.

And same question as the other, what we do when fields has keys conflicting with other fields?

By design, the last used value takes precedence (can you check the field override priority test?)
The level time msg fields are reserved.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:38:05Z

+      const serialized = this.#serializeValue(bindings[key], key);
+      result += `,${JSONStringify(key)}:${JSONStringify(serialized)}`;


Same for this, check for undefined to avoid invalid JSON.

Skipping undefined in #serializeBindings too.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:38:51Z

+  /**
+   * Attach this consumer to log channels
+   */
+  attach() {
+    for (const level of LEVEL_NAMES) {
+      if (this[level].enabled) {
+        const handler = this.handle.bind(this);
+        this.#handlers[level] = handler;
+        channels[level].subscribe(handler);
+      }
+    }
+  }


Add flag to ensure we can't attach twice

Added #attached flag, attach are idempotent now.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:44:00Z

+  * `stream` {number|string|Object} Output destination. Can be a file
+    descriptor (number), file path (string), or a writable stream object.


Would not be better to create an interface for object and explicitly declare the methods allowed? Eg: JSONConsumer calls flush/flushSync so I can't use it with createWriteStream

Now requires write, flush, flushSync, end, docs list them.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:46:36Z

+      };
+
+      // Apply serializers to additional fields
+      if (fields) {


missing validate fields as object when is defined.

Hoisted validateObject(fields, 'fields') so it runs for all branches.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:47:31Z

+    let logFields;
+
+    if (isNativeError(msgOrObj)) {
+      msg = msgOrObj.message;


If this is undefined, it will likely produce invalid json

Added ?? '' fallback for subclasses that leave message undefined.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:48:08Z

+      logFields = fields ? this.#applySerializers(fields) : kEmptyObject;
+    } else {
+      const { msg: extractedMsg, ...restFields } = msgOrObj;
+      msg = extractedMsg;


Same for this one, can produce invalid json

Already guarded by validateString(msgOrObj.msg) above.

H4ad · 2026-04-19T19:51:30Z

+    const fields = record.fields;
+    for (const key in fields) {
+      json += `,${JSONStringify(key)}:${JSONStringify(fields[key])}`;
+    }


Why not serialize the entire fields and just remove first/last bracket?

What happens when fields has keys that conflicts with other fields?

Bulk stringify: follow-up with a bench.

ast-wins by design, level, time, msg reserved.

nodejs-github-bot added the needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. label Oct 28, 2025

mertcanaltin mentioned this pull request Oct 28, 2025

Structured log package in node core #49296

Open

mertcanaltin changed the title ~~lib: added logger package in node core~~ lib: added logger api in node core Oct 28, 2025

mertcanaltin changed the title ~~lib: added logger api in node core~~ [WIP] lib: added logger api in node core Oct 28, 2025

Qard reviewed Oct 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

mertcanaltin requested a review from Qard October 29, 2025 14:16

AugustinMauroy reviewed Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

AugustinMauroy reviewed Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread benchmark/logger/basic-json.js Outdated

AugustinMauroy reviewed Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread benchmark/logger/vs-pino.js Outdated

AugustinMauroy reviewed Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

atlowChemi reviewed Oct 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

TheOneTheOnlyJJ reviewed Oct 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread test/parallel/test-log-basic.js Outdated

TheOneTheOnlyJJ reviewed Oct 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

anonrig reviewed Oct 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

mertcanaltin marked this pull request as ready for review November 29, 2025 14:16

mertcanaltin requested a review from a team as a code owner November 30, 2025 17:53

mertcanaltin force-pushed the mert/create-logger-api/node-core branch 2 times, most recently from f5b0108 to 429359b Compare November 30, 2025 18:01

yvele reviewed Nov 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/logger.js Outdated

marco-ippolito reviewed Dec 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/internal/logger/serializers.js Outdated

mertcanaltin added 3 commits April 15, 2026 05:43

delete exports (LEVELS, channels)

64a4241

edited logger api md

932db90

address review feedback for logger api

003402a

mertcanaltin force-pushed the mert/create-logger-api/node-core branch from 2d9d338 to de802ea Compare April 15, 2026 05:24

mertcanaltin added 2 commits April 15, 2026 06:26

logger: skip input validation when no subscribers

c6384d8

doc: address review feedback on logger.md

8d67c43

mertcanaltin force-pushed the mert/create-logger-api/node-core branch 2 times, most recently from a9d7b73 to b31a049 Compare April 15, 2026 05:27

mertcanaltin force-pushed the mert/create-logger-api/node-core branch from b31a049 to 3bf29a1 Compare April 15, 2026 05:40

doc: add log channels in diagnostics_channel

0f9833a

mertcanaltin force-pushed the mert/create-logger-api/node-core branch from 3bf29a1 to 0f9833a Compare April 15, 2026 05:41

mertcanaltin requested review from Qard, RafaelGSS, anonrig, atlowChemi and jasnell April 15, 2026 05:42

atlowChemi approved these changes Apr 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread lib/internal/logger/serializers.js

Comment thread lib/internal/logger/serializers.js

Comment thread lib/internal/logger/serializers.js

Comment thread lib/logger.js

mertcanaltin and others added 4 commits April 15, 2026 07:50

Update serializers.js

8ae2fb7

Co-authored-by: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>

Update serializers.js

0e635e4

Co-authored-by: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>

Update logger.js

2bb8fa6

Co-authored-by: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>

Update lib/internal/logger/serializers.js

1f2b586

Co-authored-by: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>

openjs-meetings-bot bot mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2026

Node.js Technical Steering Committee (TSC) Meeting 2026-04-22 nodejs/TSC#1850

Open

Merge branch 'main' into mert/create-logger-api/node-core

95d2f3c

H4ad reviewed Apr 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

logger: address review feedback

f2d9074

mertcanaltin requested review from H4ad and atlowChemi April 19, 2026 22:43

		const serialized = this.#serializeValue(bindings[key], key);
		result += `,${JSONStringify(key)}:${JSONStringify(serialized)}`;

		* `stream` {number\|string\|Object} Output destination. Can be a file
		descriptor (number), file path (string), or a writable stream object.

Uh oh!

Conversation

mertcanaltin commented Oct 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Architecture

API Surface

Performance

New files

Modified files

Uh oh!

nodejs-github-bot commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Oct 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Oct 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mcollina commented Oct 30, 2025

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Oct 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mcollina commented Nov 8, 2025

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Nov 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Nov 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Apr 15, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin Apr 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mertcanaltin commented Oct 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Oct 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Oct 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Oct 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Nov 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin commented Apr 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin Apr 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading

mertcanaltin Apr 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading