Manoj,
What are your JAVA OPT settings for Tomcat?

Mark

On 9/4/05, Fernando Padilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I suppose HTML page weight isn't an issue?  If tapestry behaves just
> fine on a local network then it's probably not Tapestry's fault, look at
> the network and tomcat.  I'll also mention/remind everyone to look into
> turning on the HTTP/1.1 Compression (very easy for tomcat).  It's a
> win-win sort of option for production systems!!
> 
> 
> Manoj Prakash wrote:
> > Yes, I haven't disabled caching.
> >
> > In our tests, we have seen tapestry doing pretty well if client is on
> > same network as server.
> >
> > We start to see the perf issue when:
> > 1. clients are on a separate network than the server, and in such cases;
> > tapestry/tomcat log indeed says that it is taking as much time.
> > 2. Each time you start a new browser instance to access your page( the
> > page has been accessed earlier from different clients, so initialization
> > time from the backend/server perspective is not a factor).
> >
> > I don't seem to find any explanation for it: why tapestry's response
> > time is dependent on where the client is located, and if the page is
> > being requested from the browser instance for the first time?
> >
> > Btw, as I mentioned in the original post, we are still using tapestry
> > 3.0 beta 4 version.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Manoj
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam Greene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 1:25 AM
> > To: Tapestry users
> > Subject: Re: Performance problem : simple tapestry page takes long time
> > to show up
> >
> > I have seen this discussion on and off over the last year and each time
> > someone almost always asks this question, it may seem obvious, but it
> > must
> > be asked none the less :-)
> >
> > Are you sure that you have not disabled caching within tapestry with
> > the -Dorg.apache.tapestry.disable-caching command line option?
> >
> > I am currently profiling Tapestry 4.0 Beta 5 and have come up with this
> > interesting bit of information:
> >
> > On the initial page request, it takes 72 seconds (because of profiling
> > overhead, normally 9 secs, after loaded responses are about 1sec). Of
> > those 72 seconds, 22-25 seconds of it is one method call:
> > java.util.Locale.getAvailableLocales(), which is totally outside the
> > scope
> > of Tapestry, but the call may be removable.  I am testing that now.  The
> > second biggest CPU hog is SpecificationSource.getApplicationNameSpace,
> > at 1
> > second average time and   ElementsProxyList.size at 3.8 seconds Base
> > Time
> > (less than 0.09sec average time).
> >
> > On subsequent calls Tapestry took only 1.89sec cummulative time with the
> > profiler active and given the formula of 72sec vs 9sec, that would
> > normally
> > be 0.23secs per request without profiler load.  And that request renders
> > two velocity macros via hivemind services, and construct a Rich Text
> > Editor
> > from 4 different script files requiring a processing 30Kb of script with
> > 50 string replacements and 30 asset lookups after submitting the text
> > that
> > had
> > been edited in the Rich Text Editor.  So it better than a "Hello World"
> > test
> > and
> > shows just how fast Tapestry 4.0 can be, even when under the load of a
> > profiler :-)
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Manoj Prakash" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 8:28 AM
> > Subject: Performance problem : simple tapestry page takes long time to
> > show
> > up
> >
> >
> >
> >>We have been using tapestry for over 1.5 years now for our app and
> >>recently we
> >>have started performance testing of this app. There are some
> >
> > interesting
> >
> >>observations.
> >>
> >>Background/Environment:
> >>Server : P4 2.8 GHz,1 GB RAM, Windows xp, Tomcat 4.1.30, Tapestry 3.0
> >
> > beta
> >
> >>4.
> >>Clients : P4 XP/Win2k machines with 512 MB RAM, accessing the server
> >
> > from
> >
> >>different network.
> >>
> >>App: The first page of the app is a simplest login page, the html
> >
> > template
> >
> >>is
> >>mostly static - has html form, refers a .css file, few images and
> >
> > input
> >
> >>validation script( using tapestry's support for validation). We create
> >
> > a
> >
> >>session ( by calling getVisit() ) on the login page itself before it
> >
> > is
> >
> >>rendered.
> >>
> >>
> >>Problem:
> >>One a new browser instance, this login page takes consistently 18 to
> >
> > 20
> >
> >>seconds to show up. Tomcat access log shows that it is taking upto 5
> >>seconds
> >>to process the login page request, another 5 seconds to process the
> >>request
> >>for validator.js, and almost negligible time to process the get
> >
> > requests
> >
> >>for
> >>images and .css file. We are wondering why tomcat/tapestry is taking 5
> >>seconds
> >>to process the Get request for such a simple page.
> >>
> >>To rule out the network and tomcat, and other factors for this
> >>performance, we
> >>added a similar static html file, and a similar .jsp file in our
> >
> > webapp,
> >
> >>and
> >>both show up within 3-4 seconds. Tomcat log in those cases show that
> >
> > it
> >
> >>took
> >>only milliseconds to process the get request for .html and .jsp file.
> >>
> >>Any idea why this could be happening ? Is tapestry doing some heavy
> >>initialization work when a session is created? ( View source of the
> >
> > page
> >
> >>in
> >>browser has 0 millisecond at the bottom as the render time).
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Manoj
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>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]
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to