Have you tried running the GWT compiler in headless mode?
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/Desktop/headless/
Basically, add the following JVM argument to your compilation step:
-Djava.awt.headless=true
Cheers,
Chris.
On Aug 19, 5:25 am, JIV fatcap@gmail.com wrote:
I also saw this:
http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6810745
Which suggests a workaround of specifying the JVM parameter:
-Dsun.java2d.d3d=false
On Aug 19, 2:27 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you tried running the GWT compiler in headless mode?
http://java.sun.com
I just had to debug one of these errors.
I just set a break point where the exception is raised (i.e.
SerializerBase.java:161). I ran my app in debug developer mode and
when I hit the breakpoint I was able to inspect the parent call in the
stack where there is a method parameter called instance.
Tim,
Are you filtering your Hibernate objects or translating them to DTOs (to
remove dynamic proxies etc) before serialising them?
If the answer is no to the above, then you might be falling foul to circular
references or Hibernate fetching more data than you expect. As an
experiment, is it
to the
database server so it must be doing something weird locally (like a circular
reference as you suggested). Shouldn't it give up on circular references a
bit faster than that if that's the case?
Tim
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.comwrote:
Tim
Will you be giving the -XX:+UseCompressedOops option a try when on the
64-bit JVM? I'd be interested to hear about your experiences.
Good luck.
C.
On Dec 17, 6:20 am, Gerhard Davids glacieredp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for all the responses.
The build tips surely helps Lukas.
Yeah
Hi Vikas,
Have a look here:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit/browse_thread/thread/6e39577098a87d9f/5bd043c41dc7d37c?q=
The method from the second post should get you what you need.
Cheers,
Chris.
On Dec 14, 1:28 pm, Vikas vikas.m.ya...@gmail.com wrote:
How to get timezone
There is now a case relating to this:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4355
Add you're vote if this is important to you.
Cheers,
C.
On Dec 14, 10:13 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
Right - I only found a .properties file in my project's extras
Damn typo - you're = your
On Dec 15, 9:54 am, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
There is now a case relating to this:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4355
Add you're vote if this is important to you.
Cheers,
C.
On Dec 14, 10:13 pm, Chris Lowe
Are you sure that you need the 2mb stack? I seem to recall there was
a problem a while back with stack overflows resulting in some people
suggesting large stacks. I think that's been fixed now.
Are you using a 32 or 64 bit JVM?
What are the exact compiler and JVM arguments you are using?
You could try compiling with the Pretty or Detailed options and
examine the javascript?
On Dec 15, 6:29 pm, flyingb...@gmail.com flyingb...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just wondering what is a better way to code. Using for each loops or
for loops?
I am wondering will the resulting javascript be
Yikes, that's a lot of memory!
I missed the note regarding x86 in the OP, so that puts you on a
32bit JVM.
Have you thought about renting a High Memory EC2 instance over at AWS
for a couple of hours?
C.
On Dec 15, 2:06 pm, Lukas Herman herni...@gmail.com wrote:
SOYC option on large project
]
On Dec 15, 10:43 am, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
You could try compiling with the Pretty or Detailed options and
examine the javascript?
On Dec 15, 6:29 pm, flyingb...@gmail.com flyingb...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just wondering what is a better way to code. Using for each loops
up at _runtime_.
I finally have some UiBinder code using i18n but it needed a
frustrating mix of guesswork and picking through generated assets to
get there - hopefully the documentation will be amended soon.
Cheers,
Chris.
On Dec 12, 3:42 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still
it to completely ignore my developer instance of
FireFox, my app refreshes dropped from 16 seconds to 9.
On Dec 12, 5:43 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, for now, the FireFox plugin seems to be *much* quicker that
Chrome's.
On Dec 12, 3:20 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe
and you will get a GUI to, well, manage your
profiles.
In the new profile, I cleared out all default addons and installed
only the GWT developer plugin and Firebug. Now my application
refreshes in 5 seconds - much, much better!
On Dec 13, 10:08 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote
Hello,
I've also just run into this. I couldn't see anything in the issue
tracker so I've added a new issue:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4342
Don't forget to vote (star) for this issue if it's important to you
and let's hope that this gets fixed soon.
Cheers,
Hi guys,
I too have been stung by these performance issues and, although things
are not yet as good as they can be, I found the following helpful:
Make sure localhost is defined in your /etc/hosts file. More info
here:
Actually, for now, the FireFox plugin seems to be *much* quicker that
Chrome's.
On Dec 12, 3:20 pm, Chris Lowe chris.lowe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
I too have been stung by these performance issues and, although things
are not yet as good as they can be, I found the following helpful
I've been trying to test the I18 features of UiBinder but I cannot
locate the generated properties file.
My procedure is this:
* Generate a new GWT 2.0 project called I18Test, with a package called
com.example
* Using the plugin, add a UiBinder asset called MainView to
com.example.client. I
SOP basically says that the GWT app can only talk to the domain from
where it was served. With that in mind, I think you have two options:
1. Configure the web server for your primary domain to proxy your GWT
requests to your sub-domain - mod_proxy for Apache will achieve this;
or
2. Simply
Are the List fields on your objects specified in terms of interfaces?
GWT RPC needs to know as much about your objects at compile time,
could you try using a concrete class instead - preferably ArrayList?
It sounds like you're trying to serialize ORM objects directly, is
that right? I don't
you get on.
Cheers,
Chris.
On Sep 2, 12:04 pm, David Given d...@cowlark.com wrote:
Chris Lowe wrote:
[...]
500-600 does seem like a lot of objects to be processing in one hit if
performance on a low end server is a concern, but then again 20
seconds seems like an awfully long time too
Morning David,
I've found that GWT serialization is pretty decent.
500-600 does seem like a lot of objects to be processing in one hit if
performance on a low end server is a concern, but then again 20
seconds seems like an awfully long time too.
What's the performance like in your dev
Kristian,
Do GMail or the GWT showcase application work well enough for you in
your intended browser? If so, then in all likelihood your GWT
application will perform adequately.
I'm not aware of any reliability issues as such. The only thing that
springs to mind is that GWT compiles for
Hi Ganesh,
The Hupa code is a great example to look at for MVP, command pattern
etc. If you're interested in those patterns then I've created a simple
(and standalone) example of an MVP application based on the generated
GWT starter application:
Hello,
I had better luck finding a host for for my Java stack by looking for a
regular VPS rather than looking for dedicated J2EE (or Tomcat) hosting.
There are loads out there but I've uses
http://rimuhosting.com/order/planselector.jsp for the last 18 months or so
and they've been pretty good.
27 matches
Mail list logo
