Hi Guillaume, We have also disabled the second level cache for our main application for the time being.
Maybe we should set 0 as the default cache size for 6.15.0 and explain this in the announcement + a blog + some tweets ? If an application wants to use the second level cache then it should enable it explicitly. What other Wicket devs/users think ? Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Guillaume Smet <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Some feedback you might find useful about this. > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > A workaround to avoid the slowness caused by this is to set 0 or negative > > value to org.apache.wicket.settings.StoreSettings#setInmemoryCacheSize > > We have a quite big application which was slow under load without us > being able to find the culprit. > > I set the InmemoryCacheSize to 0 yesterday and the application is now > much more reactive. > > We use a lot the disk data store as we have back links nearly > everywhere and clicking back isn't slower than before. Probably > because we couldn't set the cache too high due to memory issues and we > probably have too many users to have an effective inmemorycache with > the size we configured. > > Might be useful to spread the word about it. > > Thanks for your post on this subject. > > -- > Guillaume >
