u end solving with the problem, maybe there's
> something else to be learned!
>
> Good luck!
> Per
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Performance-optimization-tp4412659p4419111.html
> Sent from the
Sort of.. but it does not remain in the component tree and thus saves
some memroy. Is a markup.
**
Martin
2012/2/26 Igor Vaynberg :
> then its a panel
>
> -igor
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Martin Makundi
> wrote:
>>> this is the same as add(new label("foo", new loadabledetachablemod
then its a panel
-igor
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Martin Makundi
wrote:
>> this is the same as add(new label("foo", new loadabledetachablemodel()
>> { load() { return "markup" }}).setescapemdoelstrings(false))
>
> Is not completely same, because a MarkupResourceStreamProvider can
> als
> this is the same as add(new label("foo", new loadabledetachablemodel()
> { load() { return "markup" }}).setescapemdoelstrings(false))
Is not completely same, because a MarkupResourceStreamProvider can
also provide markup for other components to land on.
**
Martin
>
> -igor
>
> On Sat, Feb 25,
this is the same as add(new label("foo", new loadabledetachablemodel()
{ load() { return "markup" }}).setescapemdoelstrings(false))
-igor
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Martin Makundi
wrote:
> Now that I am working with the markupresourcestream directly, I am
> beginning to think that Wicket s
Now that I am working with the markupresourcestream directly, I am
beginning to think that Wicket should support dually both component
hierarchy and markup hierarchy.
Wicket chould have two kinds of add methods:
add(Component c)
add(String anchorId, MarkupResourceStreamProvider c)
Such a Markup
Also
public IResourceStream getMarkupResourceStream(MarkupContainer
container, Class containerClass) {
seems quite feasible for making conditional markup.
However, I must override
MarkupContainer.getAssociatedMarkupStream(enforceReload=true) and
IMarkupCacheKeyProvider.getCacheKey(==null) to
@Per about
http://www.small-improvements.com/blog/technical/tuning-wicket-session-size
You say "If condition A is met, show label A. If not, use
setVisible(false) to hide it. Combine that with Enclosures... Trouble
is, while the hidden component doesn't show up in the markup, it's
still part of t
stream is usually orders of magnitude larger than the
space taken up by the object's attributes.
>-Original Message-
>From: Per [mailto:p...@hamburg.de]
>Sent: Saturday, 25 February 2012 12:13 PM
>To: users@wicket.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Performance optimization
>
@Per
>> I wrote a blogpost over here:
>> http://www.small-improvements.com/blog/technical/tuning-wicket-session-size
Did you try this approach:
> if the component is stateless you can autoadd it in onbeforerender(),
> such components are removed at the end of the request
?
**
Martin
-
the code is
alreay quite complex to add some "unknown variables" is not possible
at the moment.
**
Martin
> Cheers,
> Per
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.
on
that topic, but I overheard other developers that there are faster
libraries. They have tradeoffs, but maybe one of them works for you.
Cheers,
Per
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Performance-optimization-tp4412659p4419130.html
Sent from the Users
apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Performance-optimization-tp4412659p4419111.html
Sent from the Users forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For a
You could make it much more efficient if you did your own streaming.
Regards,
Chris
>-Original Message-
>From: Martin Makundi [mailto:martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com]
>Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2012 4:04 PM
>To: Bertrand Guay-Paquet
>Cc: users@wicket.apache.org
>S
if the component is stateless you can autoadd it in onbeforerender(),
such components are removed at the end of the request
-igor
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Martin Makundi
wrote:
> I wonder if there could be components that would melt/dissolve after use...
>
> ... for example a label:
>
>
I wonder if there could be components that would melt/dissolve after use...
... for example a label:
container.add(new Label("xx"));
After use, the label output would become part of container's markup
output at proper position, but there would remain no reference to an
instance of label componen
ajax updates work based on components, so in this particular case you
would only be able to update the entire listview using ajax. so design
your component breakdown accordingly.
of course if you design these optimized components to be able to
produce some part of its output you can use jquery aja
Looks powerful, thanks. What about partial ajax updates, should I
design so that I can replace complete webcomponents (might restrict
optimization) or is there a way to interact nicely with wicket-ajax
with such inline code?
**
Martin
2012/2/23 Igor Vaynberg :
> you can, for example, replace the
you can, for example, replace the entire listview with a single
component like this:
class workerlist extends webcomponent implements ilinklistener {
oncomponenttagbody() {
stringbuilder markup=new stringbuilder();
markup.append("");
for (worker:list) {
m
>> I think the best optimisation for this kind of thing is probably to try to
>> reduce the component count as much as possible by implementing custom
>> components that render directly to html.
>
> +1
What might be the best way (performance-wise) to make such a custom
component (rendering the dyn
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Thomas Matthijs wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Martin Makundi <
> martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Any experiences how to optimize the performance of a Page that
>> contains nested ListView:s with a total page serialized size of
Thanks, I will try to wave my magic wand and see what happens ...
2012/2/23 Bertrand Guay-Paquet :
> Even if it is asynchronous, it uses up some of the total IO capacity of the
> server. Reading the bytes back when the page is requested again is however a
> synchronous operation and it depends on
Even if it is asynchronous, it uses up some of the total IO capacity of
the server. Reading the bytes back when the page is requested again is
however a synchronous operation and it depends on IO.
Anyway, if profiling shows that the slow part is the serialize call,
then zipping won't help.
I
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Martin Makundi <
martin.maku...@koodaripalvelut.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Any experiences how to optimize the performance of a Page that
> contains nested ListView:s with a total page serialized size of over
> 10 MB?
>
> I have made all actual data objects non-serializ
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet
wrote:
> First of all, you stated that your problem what that the serialized size was
> too big, so please don't be so rude.
>
> Now, are you sure that the slow part of serialization is not the IO for
> storing that 10MB? If it is, zipping the
First of all, you stated that your problem what that the serialized size
was too big, so please don't be so rude.
Now, are you sure that the slow part of serialization is not the IO for
storing that 10MB? If it is, zipping the page could definitely improve
performance, even if it takes a some
>> You were right about 1.4 ;)
>>
>>> Question: If you don't serialize the page then how would you get it if
>>> it is not stored when the user presses browser back button ?
>>
>> Keep it in memory as it is.
>
> Your users have big monitors but your server has to have a lot of RAM too :-)
Is easie
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Martin Makundi
wrote:
>> Wicket 1.5: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/qIaoAQ
>> This explains how page storing works.
>
> You were right about 1.4 ;)
>
>> Question: If you don't serialize the page then how would you get it if
>> it is not stored when the user
> Wicket 1.5: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/qIaoAQ
> This explains how page storing works.
You were right about 1.4 ;)
> Question: If you don't serialize the page then how would you get it if
> it is not stored when the user presses browser back button ?
Keep it in memory as it is.
**
M
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Martin Makundi
wrote:
> Wicket page serialization is asynchronous.. I wonder if it would be
> possible to queue pages in a way that they are serialized only after a
> certain timeout and if they are visited during timeout they will be
> taken directly from queue...
Wicket page serialization is asynchronous.. I wonder if it would be
possible to queue pages in a way that they are serialized only after a
certain timeout and if they are visited during timeout they will be
taken directly from queue...?
**
Martin
2012/2/23 Bernard :
> If there are thousands of ob
If there are thousands of objects in a page then there is the question
whether all of these objects actually represent state - state being
the only reason why Wicket should serialize the page.
In other words, is the page so complex that it requires 10MBytes to
serialize itself in a manner that it
Hi!
> But adding thousands of small components will still produce a big page...
>
> Suggestions:
>
> - show less items per page.
> Who wants to scroll a page with thousands items ?! Use paging and filters.
Is not an option. Our users fiddle with workshifts and they want to
see everything on one p
Hi,
Wicket 1.5 uses by default JavaSerializer (ISerializer impl based on
Java Serialization API) because it is tested well (in previous
versions of Wicket). It may be slower than other serialization
frameworks but it works well in all cases.
KryoSerializer is easy to use with Java objects and it i
(ofcourse I mean invoke within 1 minute...)
2012/2/23 Martin Makundi :
> I think that would be something that should be implemented at wicket
> core... anybody done this before?
>
> Is there any way to tell wicket NOT to serialize a page? For example
> give a timer if user does not invoke the
I think that would be something that should be implemented at wicket
core... anybody done this before?
Is there any way to tell wicket NOT to serialize a page? For example
give a timer if user does not invoke the page for 1 minutes it
will not be serializeed..?
**
Martin
2012/2/23 Juha Syrjä
Hi,
I would guess that Wicket uses a normal Java built-in serializer by default.
Here are some benchmarks for different serializer implementations
https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/wiki/ . Java's built-in
serializer is not the fastest...
--
Juha Syrjälä
On 02/23/2012 08:45 AM, Martin
But is serializing wicket native components only.. I would assume
wicket does it best.
2012/2/23 Juha Syrjälä :
> Hi,
>
> Wicket 1.5 has support for pluggable serializers via ISerializer interface,
> you could try to plug in different serializer implementations, for example
> this one https://gith
Hi,
Wicket 1.5 has support for pluggable serializers via ISerializer
interface, you could try to plug in different serializer
implementations, for example this one
https://github.com/wicketstuff/core/wiki/Kryo-Serializer . That should
make the serialization bit faster.
--
Juha Syrjälä
On 0
The problem is that the SERIALIZATION takes time. So it does not help to
ZIP AFTER serialization...
I have debugged it and it's just thousands and thousands of components.
Even printing the component paths alone take almost 10mb or more because
there is repetition ;)
**
Martin
2012/2/23 Bertran
Hi,
Have you seen the following thread?
http://apache-wicket.1842946.n4.nabble.com/Shrinking-the-session-size-simply-by-zipping-it-Saved-my-day-td4402980.html
Perhaps this can help you.
That said, 10MB seems HUGE! Since you already use detachable models,
maybe you could have a look at a memory
Hi!
Any experiences how to optimize the performance of a Page that
contains nested ListView:s with a total page serialized size of over
10 MB?
I have made all actual data objects non-serializable and available via
loadabledetachablemodel, but page Serialization seems to kill the
performance in aj
42 matches
Mail list logo
