We just made some changes to significantly reduce the RAM required for SWF9/10 compiles. You can try them out in a nightly build, and tell us if you see any improvement (or any new bugs, god forbid)
regarding the 'incremental compile' option, If you compile from the command line, the incremental option will be useless right now, since the cache it stores is in RAM. If run on the server, I don't know if it makes any difference either, it's really just a placeholder feature now and does not have an efficient implementation, it requires more work to be optimized to make much difference. On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Chris Kohlhardt <[email protected]> wrote: > After a good amount of work, we've managed to get our application > completely migrated to OL4.6.1 and SWF9. > > Thank you very much to everyone involved in making the SWF9 runtime a > reality. The performance of Gliffy is so much faster now, it's almost > unbelievable. We're entering QA next week, and we expect to release SWF9 > Gliffy in mid December. > > One thing we noticed is that compilation of SWF9 is a lot slower. After > some digging, we were able to speed things up by: > - setting compiler.swf9.incremental=true in lps.properties > - allocating at least 2GB of memory to the tomcat instance running the lps > - moving developers to a pure 64bit OS (Clint moved to Windows 7 after a > long stint with XP) > > Are there any other performance tips to consider? > > thx! > > -chris > -- Henry Minsky Software Architect [email protected]
