Most of application startup time has to do with the AOP stuff in ColdSpring, in my experience. It has to do a lot of introspection and a lot of filesystem access to set up the AOP stuff, so it takes a while. Once it's loaded, though, it's crazy fast. I haven't done any timings, but I'd wager on at least tens of milliseconds per method per proxied bean, which can add up quickly when you've got a lot of those.
If you don't use the AOP stuff, things can fire up significantly faster, though there's still all the XML to parse. As for lazy/non-lazy, I usually use lazy load during development (so I only pay for what I need), and then use non-lazy in production (so the delay happens entirely offline). But that doesn't really buy you any performance, only perceived performance. So back to your core question, no, the frameworks aren't slow. If you just loaded up Framework X, you might notice it, but probably not since it'd be a statistically insignificant percentage of execution time. However, if you USE the functionality of Framework X (i.e. build your application to use the features), then you can expect to pay something. Depending on the features you choose to use, the performance impact will be different. cheers, barneyb On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 3:12 AM, Peter Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I often have to reload when testing/tweaking so it'd be a big > issue to me. With my in-house framework set to lazy load I have never > seen a reload time of more than 2-3 seconds either in development and > production (usually it's a second to a second and a half) - and that > is fairly OO heavy and not optimized at all for performance. Can > anyone confirm if it is really the frameworks that are slow or whether > it's the applications written in the framework (doing lots of caching > to memory on start up, doing web service calls serially to load data, > etc.) that take the time. I just don't see why a framework per se > should need more than a second or two to get all loaded up. > > Experiences? > > Best Wishes, > Peter > > On Oct 6, 2008, at 4:18 PM, Tom Chiverton wrote: > >> >> On Thursday 02 Oct 2008, Adam Haskell wrote: >>> +1. The startup with many frameworks is slloowww. >> >> Applications rarely start up though, so why worry about that weird >> edge case, >> when you should be focusing on the more common usages. >> >> -- >> Tom Chiverton >> >> >> >> **************************************************** >> >> This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. >> >> Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in >> England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered >> office address is at Halliwells LLP, 3 Hardman Square, >> Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB. A list of members is available >> for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner >> in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. >> Regulated by The Solicitors Regulation Authority. >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY >> >> This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above >> and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the >> addressee you must not read it and must not use any information >> contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells >> LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have >> received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells >> LLP IT Department on 0870 365 2500. >> >> For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com. >> >> > > > > > > -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.barneyb.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" 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/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
