On Jan 7, 2008 12:04 AM, C. Bergström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 22:30 +0100, Johan Compagner wrote:
> > You could make such a thing as an extentions project as a special
> > session store or ipagestore. But i dont see the big gain because its
> > not the reading (that doesnt happen a lot, or the writing (done in
> > separate thread)) the time is spend in serialization. But the overhead
> > we encountered was 20% or something like that. But the gain we have is
> > way less memory usage so in the end we can handle more clients with
> > 1.3
>
> Can we define 'way less' ? I've also been giving this some thought and
> what's the use pattern for the back button..
>
> Speaking of 20% performance hits.. Take a look at the difference between
> beta3 and 1.3 final.. There were some threading changes which certainly
> had an impact.  (This is more a general observation based on casual
> testing.)
>
> Feel free to ignore these questions as I'm more 'thinking out loud' and
> can answer them myself..
>
> 1) How often do people click the back button in my app?
> 2) Do we notice any trends? Such as the max duration any user for my app
> has used the back button? (say 1-5 minutes)
> 3) How many versions back did they actually use?
> 4) Am I willing to trade off losing user density per node for being able
> to effectively cluster easily?
> 5) Can I just reverse proxy my app and use sticky sessions to push user
> foo always to a specific node?
> 6) For pages with a complex component hierarchy how memory usage are we
> *really* talking and how could I measure/estimate this?
>
>
> Lets use some imaginary numbers..
> Dell Poweredge with 4GB ram (I've seen this setup in production using
> Wicket)
>
> On a real app using hibernate and a multitude of things going on in the
> background I've seen the app roughly be able to handle 50 requests per
> second when testing with siege and a recorded click pattern.  (We were
> running some *heavy* reports to explain why this number is so low)  (We
> can compare this to 4200~ rps for a Wicket hello world and 5300~ using
> lighttpd serving static content.)  So with this sort of use case and
> theoretical max users the amount of memory usage can't be *that* high in
> order to justify not having the convenience/features to use something
> like ehcache.
>
> Matej.. I haven't looked at how difficult it would be to implement, but
> would someone post some ehcache 2nd level cache store code so I could
> run some real numbers with it?

The implementation is no longer available, because the interfaces have
changed. And I really don't get the benefits of ehcache pagestore
implementation.

-Matej

>
> Thanks
>
> ./C
>
>

Reply via email to