John McNally wrote:
>
> > 4546 TWMS handleRequest done (screens/SiteInfo)
> > 4546 TWMS handleRequest start (layouts/default.wm)
> > 4546 TWMS handleRequest got template (layouts/default.wm)
> > 5359 TWMS handleRequest start (navigations//LeftNav)
> > 5375 TWMS handleRequest got template (navigations//LeftNav)
> > 5546 TWMS handleRequest wrote template (navigations//LeftNav)
> > 5546 TWMS handleRequest result to string (navigations//LeftNav)
> > 5546 TWMS handleRequest done (navigations//LeftNav)
> > 6578 TWMS handleRequest start (navigations//TopNav)
>
> It appears there is a penalty incurred by parsing a template within a
> template. I was thinking that the way we were calling the navigation
> templates was actually faster since they could be cached by WM, unlike when
> using the #parse directive. But are they? There is a .8 s when starting
> the LeftNav and 1.3 s lapse when starting the TopNav.
>
> This is certainly worth extra effort to figure out exactly what is causing
> this delay.
I removed my #parse directives in the 4 templates listed above but it
didn't change anything, still the same speed. I was only #parse'ing a
file with some global variables and a file with some reuseable layout
stuff, they need to be parsed becase they include references to context
variables.
my default.wm looks only like this, isn't this pretty normal.
$navigation.setTemplate("/LeftNav")
$navigation.setTemplate("/TopNav")
$screen_placeholder
So now all templates are run through Turbine and none are #parse'd
in addition by webmacro..
I guess I could use some suggestions in which direction to look...
should
I look at the webmacro methods called by handleRequest, or is webmacro
itself pretty fast already?
Thanks for any help..
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
