OK, thanks. ---------- Bindu Wavell VP Engineering Zia Consulting, Inc. M: +1 720-436-8146
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Florian Müller <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Bindu, The console window inherits the session from the Workbench. When you reconnect with the Workbench, the old console windows still use the old sessions. When you open a new console window after a reconnect, the new window uses the new session. It is not necessary to completely quit the Workbench. Florian > I've been doing some performance testing using the various CMIS bindings for > Alfresco. I'm using Workbench 0.8 against Alfresco Enterprise 4.1.2 (and > 4.1.2.8). I have the following simple test script: > > --- > import org.apache.chemistry.opencmis.client.api.* > import groovy.time.* > > Date start = new Date(); > println start; > > OperationContext ctx = session.createOperationContext(); > println session.getObjectByPath("/Google Legal DMS/M&A Projects/My > Project/Forms").getChildren(ctx).getTotalNumItems(); > > Date stop = new Date(); > println stop; > > TimeDuration td = TimeCategory.minus( stop, start ) > println td > > println "DONE"; > --- > > For the longest time it appeared to me that all 4 binding options I could > test 3.x AtomPub, 3.x Web Services, 4.x AtomPub and 4.x Web Services all > performed the same. When I started testing later I'd still see all of the > performance being the same, but it might be significantly different than it > was earlier in the day. What I have discovered is that if I quit Workbench > and create one of these connections, open the console and run my script. I > see consistent performance for that binding. If I quit and restart Workbench > and use a different binding, open a console and run the same script, I > consistently see different performance. > > So now I can get a handle on the performance differences between the > bindings, but I can't just click the Connection toolbar button and switch > bindings, I have to fully quit Workbench and restart to switch bindings. > > > -- Bindu
