Sylvain Wallez wrote: >>Net Result: I think Cocoon 2.0, as it stands, doesn't scale, but the >>data provided it's not sufficient to understand *what* slows Cocoon >>down. >> >>Michael, I'd love if you guys could perform some more load tests for us: >> >0) before disabling logging, search for messages such as >"decommissioning instance of...". This reveals some undersized pools >which are corrected by tuning cocoon.xconf and sitemap.xmap. Undersized >pools act like an object factory, plus the ComponentManager overhead. > Just a thought, as not tuning the pools is probably going to be a common and easy mistake for people who are starting to evaluate Cocoon and get bad performance results, what about an adaptable pool which starts tuning its configuration after a while depending on usage ? Is this achievable at all ?
Best regards, Michael Hartle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
