[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4042?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15225078#comment-15225078
 ] 

Bill Lucy commented on MYFACES-4042:
------------------------------------

Right, those mapping rules make sense.  My logic here, though, is that 11.4.2 
says that we can essentially skip that automatic mapping for performance, so 
why don't we make it configurable?

> Improve startup time by skipping classpath jar scan for *.faces-config.xml
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MYFACES-4042
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-4042
>             Project: MyFaces Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 2.1.18, 2.2.9
>         Environment: WebSphere
>            Reporter: Bill Lucy
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: MYFACES-4042.patch
>
>
> In version 2.1 org.apache.myfaces.ee6.MyFacesContainerInitializer was updated 
> to scan for faces-config.xml resources in applications JARs during startup, 
> as part of the process to add a FacesConfig in onStartup().  This is a very 
> expensive scan, since we have to iterate over every file in every jar on the 
> app classpath.  
> This scan is not completely necessary: in the spec we have:
> Section 11.4.2 “Application Startup Behavior”
> Implementations may check for the presence of a servlet-class definition of 
> class javax.faces.webapp.FacesServlet in the web application deployment 
> descriptor as a means to abort the configuration process and reduce startup 
> time for applications that do not use JavaServer Faces Technology.
> Which I interpret to mean that skipping checking the app jars at init time - 
> for the purpose of adding a dynamic FacesServlet - is valid.  Given the 
> performance hit for the scan, I think adding a context param to disable the 
> scan would be worthwhile.  Something like:
> org.apache.myfaces.INITIALIZE_SKIP_JAR_FACES_CONFIG_SCAN
> Would this be worthwhile for others?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to