Dakota Jack wrote:
Why don't you break it down and find out where the time is going?
So in summary.. now that I'm suspicious that its a tag instantiation
issue I'm going to load up the webapp with FULL instrumentation... its
about 8x slower but I think I'll need that level of granularity here.
Why don't you break it down and find out where the time is going?
On 4/18/05, Kevin Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> QM wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 02:19:15PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
> >: So its clearly not JUST reflected methods its something else on top of
> >: it
> >
> >What
QM wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 02:19:15PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
: So its clearly not JUST reflected methods its something else on top of
: it
What does your profiler report?
-QM
I can't for the life of me figure it out!
It certainly reports that doTag is taking a LOT of time but no
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 02:19:15PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
: So its clearly not JUST reflected methods its something else on top of
: it
What does your profiler report?
-QM
--
software -- http://www.brandxdev.net/
tech news -- http://www.RoarNetworX.com/
code scan -- http://www.JxR
To execute a tag file requires creating some new objects which migh have an
overhead not quite comparable to RequestDispatcher.include()
Thats probably the issue.
-Tim
Kevin Burton wrote:
Tim Funk wrote:
Its not reflection killing you. For example, time this:
<%=System.currentTimeMillis()%>
${
Tim Funk wrote:
Its not reflection killing you. For example, time this:
<%=System.currentTimeMillis()%>
${more.cowbell}
<%=System.currentTimeMillis()%>
Where more is any java object and cowbell is a property
(getCowbell()). In simple timing trials - even where iterations is
greater than 2000
Its not reflection killing you. For example, time this:
<%=System.currentTimeMillis()%>
${more.cowbell}
<%=System.currentTimeMillis()%>
Where more is any java object and cowbell is a property (getCowbell()). In
simple timing trials - even where iterations is greater than 2000 - I get
subsecon
Dakota Jack wrote:
Why would you have to have an entirely new "reflection" for more than
one database call? That sound like a design SNAFU to me. Looks to me
like you should be having one use of reflection instead of 1000.
I don't have to have it. Tomcat is *doing* it. Forget the DB. If I
h
Why would you have to have an entirely new "reflection" for more than
one database call? That sound like a design SNAFU to me. Looks to me
like you should be having one use of reflection instead of 1000.
Jack
On 4/17/05, Kevin Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dakota Jack wrote:
>
> >1000 on
Dakota Jack wrote:
1000 on a page? Really? That seems very odd to me given my
experience. What would a page like that look like? Do you have
examples?
So psuedo code...
- get a list of objects from your DB.. Say 500
- for each object
tag A
tag B
tag C
fn:length
And so forth... That
1000 on a page? Really? That seems very odd to me given my
experience. What would a page like that look like? Do you have
examples?
On 4/17/05, Kevin Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> QM wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 03:44:59PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
> >: We've had a few bottlen
QM wrote:
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 03:44:59PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
: We've had a few bottlenecks in our code that have since been removed but
: the remaining big bottleneck is Tomcat. The JSP engine is creating
: compiled code that is heavily relying on reflection.
: [snip]
:
: Is there AN
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 03:44:59PM -0700, Kevin Burton wrote:
: We've had a few bottlenecks in our code that have since been removed but
: the remaining big bottleneck is Tomcat. The JSP engine is creating
: compiled code that is heavily relying on reflection.
: [snip]
:
: Is there ANY way to g
I've been spending this week running a profiler across our webapp and
Tomcat.
We've had a few bottlenecks in our code that have since been removed but
the remaining big bottleneck is Tomcat. The JSP engine is creating
compiled code that is heavily relying on reflection. Reflection
shouldn't
14 matches
Mail list logo
