I agree, I had that convern as well. The current jars in lib/core are: beanutils logging collections digester ognl oscore velocity
We could get rid of beanutils, digester, and collections. That's something XWork is using but really has no need to (we could parse the simple XML by hand). So yes, we would add velocity as a dependency. But performance is so much improved that it's well worth it (IMO). -Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Ottinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 11:00 PM Subject: Re: [OS-webwork] Velocity as the UI widgets [WW 2.0] > I'll be at the dev meeting, provided nothing comes up, but: my only qualm > with using velocity for the UI tags is that it adds velocity dependency to > WW, whereas right now, WW only requires commons-collections, > commons-logging, digester, beanutils... oh, forget it. :) > > On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Rickard Öberg wrote: > > > Patrick Lightbody wrote: > > > Small followup to that: > > > > > > In a result JSP (success.jsp in the example app for WW 2.0) I placed 50 > > > calls of either: > > > > > > <ww:textfield .../> > > > > > > or > > > > > > <ww:vmtextfield ../> > > > > > > Average response time when using the JSP-based components: 162ms > > > Average response time when using the velocity-based components: 38ms > > > > > > That's a performance boost of 4X. Also, I don't have a test for this, but it > > > "feels" like velocity also scales more. Here's my less scientific test: > > > > > > Using the JSP-based example from above, I held down "reload" so that about > > > 40 http requests were sent in. The time for the final 20 requesst to be > > > handled took on average 40 -seconds-. When using velocity under the same > > > test, the final 20 requests took on average 1.4 seconds. That's a > > > scalability factor of about 30X! > > > > As I may have mentioned we are basing our SiteVision CMS/portal product > > entirely on WebWork/Velocity. Based on benchmarks I've done the above > > sounds about right (e.g. an average page with about 10 Velocity portlets > > render in ~50ms, even under high load). Velocity is incredibly fast, and > > scales very well. > > > > Which is why I proposed that we switch to it for the UI tags. I'm happy > > to see that your tests verify this idea :-) > > > > /Rickard > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > > http://www.vasoftware.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Opensymphony-webwork mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
