A little question about the AspViewBase patch : To get the IDictionaryAdapterFactory from the IEngineContext, this service must be registered in the underlying IoC container. As far as I know, this component is external, and nothing forces someone to register it.
The question is : should it be added to the IMonoRailServices interface ? On Feb 21, 11:03 pm, Gildas <[email protected]> wrote: > :) Well, I'll send you both monday then. > > I'm glad if this can be helpful. > > -- > Gildas > > On Feb 21, 10:44 pm, Ken Egozi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There is a probable reason - sloppy coding on my part. > > > I'd appreciate a patch. > > > and another one for the assemblies dictionary in the DictAdapterFactory. > > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Gildas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > So, from what I saw with dottrace, a lot of time was spent in the > > > dictionary adapter factory, which I use heavily. In fact, the > > > Assembly.GetName() method is slow. > > > > The problem is that I use for Session, Context, view components and > > > controllers property bag and flash, even for helpers access from a > > > view component code. AspView use it too. > > > > So, I made my own implementation of the dictionary adapter factory > > > which keeps a Dictionary<Assembly, string> with the assemblies and > > > their names. I saw an improvement already with this. Then, I found out > > > that AspViewBase instanciate a new DictionaryAdapterFactory in its > > > constructor instead of resolving this service through the engine > > > context. I changed that too. I hope Ken will read this. There's > > > probably a good reason for that but the performances were better too > > > after this change. > > > > Andre, I've checked the lock counters for SQL : nothing special. There > > > was a lot of locks request, but no wait time and no dead locks. > > > > I'll let the website run some days and will let you know how it goes. > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > -- > > > Gildas > > > > On Feb 20, 7:29 pm, Gildas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I know, it does not looks complex on the public side. But the > > > > administration is. > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:28 pm, Gildas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > For information, the website is the one accessible through those > > > > > urls : > > > > > >http://octogames.fr(french)http://jogar-jogos.net(pt) > > > > > > And 100 others domains, in a bit more than 20 languages. > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:23 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > use DotTrace to pin point the problem, please. > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Gildas <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes > > > > > > > > On Feb 20, 7:11 pm, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can you repro this on dev machine? > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Gildas > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Andre, thanks for answering. I did answer minutes ago but > > > > > > > > > it > > > looks > > > > > > > > > like google did not care... > > > > > > > > > > We use NH 2nd level cache a lot and the sql server process > > > rarely move > > > > > > > > > but I must admit I did not check those counters. I'll try that > > > > > > > > > tomorrow. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Gildas > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 20, 6:41 pm, Andre Loker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Just a wild guess, maybe there are concurrent database locks > > > that > > > > > > > block > > > > > > > > > > the requests. Have you checked the isolation levels of DB > > > > > > > transactions > > > > > > > > > > and the Windows performance logs (there are some performance > > > counters > > > > > > > > > > regarding sql server locks). > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Andre > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > We have a rather complex monorail/activerecord/rhino > > > application. > > > > > > > We > > > > > > > > > > > noticed a very high CPU consumption under heavy load so I > > > tried to > > > > > > > > > > > make some tests on our development server with wcat. > > > > > > > > > > > > When only one user is accessing the application, the CPU > > > stay > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > 3 or 5%. As soon as another one is accessing the > > > application at the > > > > > > > > > > > same time, the CPU exceed 90%. We use a lot of > > > viewcomponents which > > > > > > > > > > > cache their output, so that's should not be the rendering > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > > > I suspect a lock or something similar is happening. I > > > > > > > > > > > tried > > > to find > > > > > > > > > > > out what using dottrace but every single method take a > > > > > > > > > > > long > > > time to > > > > > > > > > > > execute when 2 users are accessing the application. > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anybody have any ideas about what to look for ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks ! > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Gildas > > > -- > > Ken > > Egozi.http://www.kenegozi.com/bloghttp://www.delver.comhttp://www.musicglue... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
