Comparison
How Logixlysia compares to evlog and other Elysia loggers
Feature matrix
| Capability | Logixlysia | evlog | @bogeychan/elysia-logger |
|---|---|---|---|
| Elysia plugin | Yes | Yes (evlog/elysia) | Yes |
| Pino-backed | Yes | Optional drains | Yes |
| Request context accumulation | mergeContext | log.set() | Manual |
| Single access log per request | Auto | log.emit() | Auto |
| File rotation | Yes | Via drains | Limited |
autoRedact PII | Yes | Varies | Manual |
| WebSocket lifecycle logs | wrapWs | Manual | Manual |
| OTel trace correlation | logixlysia/otel | Built-in integrations | Manual |
| AI usage on access log | logixlysia/ai | evlog/ai | Manual |
Presets (dev / prod) | Yes | N/A | N/A |
When to choose Logixlysia
- You want Pino performance with Elysia-native
store.loggerergonomics. - You need file logging and rotation without wiring a separate drain.
- You prefer incremental context (
mergeContext) plus automatic access logs instead of migrating to a wide-event-only API.
When to consider evlog
- You want a unified wide-event pipeline across many frameworks with managed drains (Axiom, etc.).
- You rely heavily on
evlog/aiandevlogauth integrations out of the box.
Benchmarks
Run the monorepo benchmark package:
bun run benchThe Elysia plugin request path suite compares full handle() overhead for Logixlysia, evlog, and elysia-logger. Results vary by machine—use them for regression tracking, not absolute rankings.