Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here and we dont notice a difference So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you sure for example that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Indeed, it is a very big component hierarchy (It contains at least 3 levels of nested AjaxTabbedPanel components). The application is, in fact, a single page and it uses a lot of ajax to perform the updates. The model reflect the component hierarchy (Appliction has a single modelObject which nests another objects corresponding to each component). I do not have a lot of detaching logic, because it is important to have all the data in the model (caching), also because the services are very costly operations. If this description is not enough for replication, I will be glad to help by giving you another details. Alex. Martijn Dashorst wrote: How big is the page? Sounds like a really, really big component hierarchy. Then it sounds reasonable that the httpsession store is much faster: it keeps it in ram, and doesn't use serialization until the session is serialized (server shutting down, deciding to put session to disk or replication of session across cluster) iirc. I think we would appreciate some way of replicating your results. I assume you can't share the actual code, but could you share a spin-off of the page's component structure and a Model that replicates the data stuff's size (including the detach logic)? Martijn On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the pages wouldn't be serializable, it wouldn't work in development mode. Is it right? I think that it is not necessarily about how large is application, in my case it is about how large is the model I'm working with for that specific request (ajax request). My action was: fetch a subview of a very large table 300x300, each cell has a heavy model object. Alex. Johan Compagner wrote: that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here and we dont notice a difference So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you sure for example that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590661 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590661 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Turn on SecondLevelCacheSessionStore, and use FilePageStore as IPageStore (specified in session store constructor). Then go to your tmp dir and you should be able to find the serialized pages there. -Matej On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can I figure it out? Johan Compagner wrote: if you save the page to disk how big is it? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Indeed, it is a very big component hierarchy (It contains at least 3 levels of nested AjaxTabbedPanel components). The application is, in fact, a single page and it uses a lot of ajax to perform the updates. The model reflect the component hierarchy (Appliction has a single modelObject which nests another objects corresponding to each component). I do not have a lot of detaching logic, because it is important to have all the data in the model (caching), also because the services are very costly operations. If this description is not enough for replication, I will be glad to help by giving you another details. Alex. Martijn Dashorst wrote: How big is the page? Sounds like a really, really big component hierarchy. Then it sounds reasonable that the httpsession store is much faster: it keeps it in ram, and doesn't use serialization until the session is serialized (server shutting down, deciding to put session to disk or replication of session across cluster) iirc. I think we would appreciate some way of replicating your results. I assume you can't share the actual code, but could you share a spin-off of the page's component structure and a Model that replicates the data stuff's size (including the detach logic)? Martijn On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the pages wouldn't be serializable, it wouldn't work in development mode. Is it right? I think that it is not necessarily about how large is application, in my case it is about how large is the model I'm working with for that specific request (ajax request). My action was: fetch a subview of a very large table 300x300, each cell has a heavy model object. Alex. Johan Compagner wrote: that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here and we dont notice a difference So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you sure for example that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590627 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12591276 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590661 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12591440 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590627 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12591276 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590627 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12591276 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12592522 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590627 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
a difference So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you sure for example that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
the data stuff's size (including the detach logic)? Martijn On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the pages wouldn't be serializable, it wouldn't work in development mode. Is it right? I think that it is not necessarily about how large is application, in my case it is about how large is the model I'm working with for that specific request (ajax request). My action was: fetch a subview of a very large table 300x300, each cell has a heavy model object. Alex. Johan Compagner wrote: that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here and we dont notice a difference So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you sure for example that the pages are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give up using SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the application is very slow. Johan Compagner wrote: invocation count 1?? So you only do 1 request and you profile that? thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the same time (10 for 100 request or something like that) to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) johan On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of the SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the Application#newSessionStore to HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application overall performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, but when it is about a large one - things changes. Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a profiling of an action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a profiling for the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The difference is huge: 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but I've noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to the HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the application. Alex. http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg Matej Knopp-2 wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com . - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
and also keep the ui state down to a minimum - which will make your app clusterable and thus scalable for the future. the app is clusterable it could serialize it just fine ;) 32MB and everything is serializeable thats an accomplishment! johan
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
On 9/8/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Also thanks to Matej who recently added a very, very optimized page store variant, *and* contributed an efficient page store that can be used in a cluster. Which page store class are you referring to? org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.pagestore.DiskPageStore or something else? Sean - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
On 9/9/07, Sean Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/8/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Also thanks to Matej who recently added a very, very optimized page store variant, *and* contributed an efficient page store that can be used in a cluster. Which page store class are you referring to? org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.pagestore.DiskPageStore or something else? I am referring to org.apache.wicket.cluster.pagestore.ClusteredDiskPageStore, which is in http://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicket-jetty-cluster-pagestore and that needs http://wicket-stuff.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/wicket-stuff/trunk/wicket-jetty-cluster Like you can see from the name, it is very specifically written for Jetty, at least right now. We'll probably be working on this in the next few weeks, and we might move it to e.g. a google code project when we split it up in more projects. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Even the regular DiskPageStore is optimized for use in clustered environment, as it reuses serialized page instances when the session is being replicated. -Matej On 9/9/07, Sean Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/8/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Also thanks to Matej who recently added a very, very optimized page store variant, *and* contributed an efficient page store that can be used in a cluster. Which page store class are you referring to? org.apache.wicket.protocol.http.pagestore.DiskPageStore or something else? Sean - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Is it not recommended because the new disk-based session store is just a better all-around solution or because using the httpsessionstore is dangerous or broken in some way in 1.3? Thanks, -Ryan On Sep 7, 2007, at 3:10 PM, Matej Knopp wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the- SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
On 9/7/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. And if you are interested in just profiling etc, you could just use SLCSS and a dummy file page store. You're back button won't work in that case, but for profiling that's probably not relevant. But I agree with Matej, it is unlikely that SLCSS is a bottleneck, even though intuition might point to that. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
Hi Eelco, Thanks for the thorough response (as usual). We're almost done converting from Tap 4 to Wicket 1.2 and we'll look into migrating to 1.3 pretty soon. I was planning on reverting to the HttpSessionStore immediately because I assumed the new disk-based store(s) traded performance for memory efficiency (and we have the luxury of not really caring about RAM usage due to a limited number of users in a LAN-only environment). An old benchmark that Jonathan posted (http://www.jroller.com/ JonathanLocke/entry/how_fast_is_wicket) suggested the HttpSessionStore was noticeably faster, but I know there have been a lot of performance improvements since then. I've been pretty cynical about the whole idea of a disk-based store, actually. It always seemed like jumping a fence into a servlet container/app server's area of responsibility (had a slightly nasty argument with Johan about that). While it always sounded like a cool and very powerful/useful *option* to build into the framework, I never thought it would be a clear winner over HttpSessionStore. My main fear was that it would lead to a kind of split between some people using one store and some the other, and that it might cascade further into the framework (e.g. design x is a better fit with SLCSS but design y is better for HttpSessionStore) ultimately becoming a big drag for you guys. So that's a long way of saying: damn, I'm impressed. Not only is 1-2ms negligible, it sounds like the SLCSS is a conceptually simpler approach. Oh, and sorry to Johan for being a skeptic. ;) -Ryan On Sep 8, 2007, at 2:27 PM, Eelco Hillenius wrote: On 9/8/07, Ryan Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it not recommended because the new disk-based session store is just a better all-around solution or because using the httpsessionstore is dangerous or broken in some way in 1.3? It is a better all-round solution: it is more efficient memory wise, and the cost of serializing and saving is neglect-able in our experience (like 1 or 2 miliseconds per request even without Matej's recent optimizations). HttpSessionStore (in 1.3, but also in 1.2) suffers from some limitations that the SLCSS doesn't have. Particularly, back button history is limited, and while we don't experience many real problems with it, we feel that recording change objects isn't as robust as just serializing the page exactly as it is. It sounds way more efficient to do just the change objects, but compared to just serializing the page, it hardly seems to be in practice. Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
On 9/8/07, Ryan Holmes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Eelco, Thanks for the thorough response (as usual). We're almost done converting from Tap 4 to Wicket 1.2 and we'll look into migrating to 1.3 pretty soon. I was planning on reverting to the HttpSessionStore immediately because I assumed the new disk-based store(s) traded performance for memory efficiency (and we have the luxury of not really caring about RAM usage due to a limited number of users in a LAN-only environment). An old benchmark that Jonathan posted (http://www.jroller.com/ JonathanLocke/entry/how_fast_is_wicket) suggested the HttpSessionStore was noticeably faster, but I know there have been a lot of performance improvements since then. I've been pretty cynical about the whole idea of a disk-based store, actually. It always seemed like jumping a fence into a servlet container/app server's area of responsibility (had a slightly nasty argument with Johan about that). While it always sounded like a cool and very powerful/useful *option* to build into the framework, I never thought it would be a clear winner over HttpSessionStore. My main fear was that it would lead to a kind of split between some people using one store and some the other, and that it might cascade further into the framework (e.g. design x is a better fit with SLCSS but design y is better for HttpSessionStore) ultimately becoming a big drag for you guys. So that's a long way of saying: damn, I'm impressed. Not only is 1-2ms negligible, it sounds like the SLCSS is a conceptually simpler approach. Oh, and sorry to Johan for being a skeptic. ;) I owe him an apology too in that sense, as I was one of the people most opposed to it initially. That turned out to be a premature optimization related fear I had. Also thanks to Matej who recently added a very, very optimized page store variant, *and* contributed an efficient page store that can be used in a cluster. And thanks for both of them for doing some pretty smart optimizations on serialization of pages (which I completely missed at first). Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disable the SecondLevelPageCache?
You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. What are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the session store. -Matej On 9/7/07, jamieballing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want to disable the second level page cache. Is there any way to do this? Thanks, Jamie -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
