On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Steve Downey wrote:
> > On a production site it isn't a big factor - there are not too many
> > reloads.
> >
>
> Depends. I've done some content publishing work where JSPs are replaced
> quite often while the engine is running. Of course, there are other ways of
> accomplishing the same effect, for example including HTML fragments. But it
> would turn out, often enough, that we'd need to inject some code into the
> text. Usually something trivial, like a link to the secure side of the same
> server, or iterating over a dynamic list.
>
> I think we'd end up with hundreds, maybe low Ks, of dead classes in memory.
Then you can use the other mangler - that's why we have 2 :-)
Many sites use webapplication and redeploy the webapp if they change
something - many times you'll also change some java class ( especially if
you don't use scriptlets ).
Or even better - you could reload the application ( that will happen
automatically if you change a servlet or java class or web.xml - and soon
TLDs etc ).
Also the old unused class can be removed from memory - it's just a bug in
some VMs that require the class loader to be removed too. I might be wrong
on this one.
Costin
