StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Log Management
  4. Logging Tools
  5. Bunyan vs Log4j

Bunyan vs Log4j

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Log4j
Log4j
Stacks3.1K
Followers101
Votes0
GitHub Stars3.5K
Forks1.7K
Bunyan
Bunyan
Stacks315
Followers15
Votes0
GitHub Stars7.2K
Forks517

Bunyan vs Log4j: What are the differences?

  1. API and Language Support: Bunyan is mainly for Node.js applications, while Log4j is primarily used in Java applications. Bunyan offers support for logging in JSON format, which is beneficial for structured logging and integration with modern log processing tools in the Node.js ecosystem. On the other hand, Log4j provides a wide range of logging levels and appenders that can be configured using XML or properties files in Java applications.

  2. Configuration and Customization: Bunyan has a simpler configuration setup compared to Log4j, which allows for easy customization and integration with other Node.js modules. Log4j, on the other hand, provides more extensive configuration options, allowing users to fine-tune logging behavior through various properties and XML configurations. This difference can impact the ease of use and complexity of managing logging in applications.

  3. Performance and Scalability: Log4j is known for its high performance and scalability, making it a popular choice for enterprise-level Java applications. It offers asynchronous logging and sophisticated buffering mechanisms to handle a high volume of log messages efficiently. In contrast, while Bunyan is efficient for Node.js applications, it may not provide the same level of performance and scalability features as Log4j, especially in large and complex systems.

  4. Community and Ecosystem: Log4j has a longstanding history and a large community of Java developers contributing to its ecosystem with various extensions, plugins, and integrations. This widespread adoption and support make it a robust logging framework for Java applications. On the other hand, Bunyan, being more specific to Node.js, may have a smaller community and fewer third-party integrations compared to Log4j.

  5. Support for Features: Bunyan focuses on providing structured logging capabilities out of the box, emphasizing clarity and ease of log analysis. Log4j, on the other hand, offers a broader range of features, including hierarchical loggers, logging filters, and custom logging formats, allowing for more flexibility and control over the logging process, especially in large codebases.

  6. Logging Architecture and Performance Overheads: Bunyan's architecture is designed for minimal performance overhead and efficient log processing in Node.js applications, making it suitable for fast-paced and real-time systems. On the contrary, Log4j's extensive feature set and architecture may introduce additional performance overhead, especially in complex logging configurations, impacting the application's runtime performance and resource utilization.

In Summary, Bunyan and Log4j differ in terms of their target platforms, configuration complexity, performance, community support, feature sets, and logging architecture, making each logging framework more suitable for specific use cases and development environments.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Log4j
Log4j
Bunyan
Bunyan

It is an open source logging framework. With this tool – logging behavior can be controlled by editing a configuration file only without touching the application binary and can be used to store the Selenium Automation flow logs.

It is a simple and fast JSON logging module for node.js services. It has extensible streams system for controlling where log records go (to a stream, to a file, log file rotation, etc.)

-
Elegant log method API; Extensible streams system for controlling where log records go (to a stream, to a file, log file rotation, etc.); bunyan CLI for pretty-printing and filtering of Bunyan logs; simple include of log call source location (file, line, function) with src: true; lightweight specialization of Logger instances with log.child; Custom rendering of logged objects with "serializers"; Runtime log snooping via DTrace support; Support for a few runtime environments: Node.js, Browserify, Webpack, NW.js
Statistics
GitHub Stars
3.5K
GitHub Stars
7.2K
GitHub Forks
1.7K
GitHub Forks
517
Stacks
3.1K
Stacks
315
Followers
101
Followers
15
Votes
0
Votes
0
Integrations
Spring Boot
Spring Boot
Java
Java
Apache Maven
Apache Maven
Node.js
Node.js
Restify
Restify
Webpack
Webpack
Browserify
Browserify

What are some alternatives to Log4j, Bunyan?

Seq

Seq

Seq is a self-hosted server for structured log search, analysis, and alerting. It can be hosted on Windows or Linux/Docker, and has integrations for most popular structured logging libraries.

Loki

Loki

Loki is a horizontally-scalable, highly-available, multi-tenant log aggregation system inspired by Prometheus. It is designed to be very cost effective and easy to operate, as it does not index the contents of the logs, but rather a set of labels for each log stream.

Castle Core

Castle Core

It provides common Castle Project abstractions including logging services. It also features Castle DynamicProxy a lightweight runtime proxy generator, and Castle DictionaryAdapter.

Fluent Bit

Fluent Bit

It is a super fast, lightweight, and highly scalable logging and metrics processor and forwarder. It is the preferred choice for cloud and containerized environments.

CocoaLumberjack

CocoaLumberjack

CocoaLumberjack is a fast & simple, yet powerful & flexible logging framework for Mac and iOS.

uno

uno

We built uno, a small tool similar to uniq (the UNIX CLI tool that removes duplicates) - but with fuzziness. uno considers two lines to be equal if their edit distance is less than a specified threshold, by default set to 30%. It reads from stdin and prints the deduplicated lines to stdout.

Zap

Zap

Zap takes a different approach. It includes a reflection-free, zero-allocation JSON encoder, and the base Logger strives to avoid serialization overhead and allocations wherever possible. By building the high-level SugaredLogger on that foundation, zap lets users choose when they need to count every allocation and when they'd prefer a more familiar, loosely typed API.

NanoLog

NanoLog

It is an extremely performant nanosecond scale logging system for C++ that exposes a simple printf-like API and achieves over 80 million logs/second at a median latency of just over 7 nanoseconds.

SwiftyBeaver

SwiftyBeaver

It is Swift-based logging framework for iOS and macOS. It has different types of log messages where also we can filter logs to make bug checking even easier and has a free license plan.

LogDevice

LogDevice

LogDevice is a scalable and fault tolerant distributed log system. While a file-system stores and serves data organized as files, a log system stores and delivers data organized as logs. The log can be viewed as a record-oriented, append-only, and trimmable file.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana