Hi Dan,
As far as I can see the fix [1] for ISIS-1759 [2] is not merged to
current release of Apache Isis [3]
[1] https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=isis.git;a=commitdiff;h=c6c2fc7
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-1759
[3]
https://github.com/apache/isis/blob/master/core/viewer-wicket-model/src/main/java/org/apache/isis/viewer/wicket/model/models/ScalarModel.java#L290
We're upgrading to 1.16.0 now but the issue is still there...
Did I miss something or is the issue not fixed yet?
Thanks,
Erik
On 10/26/2017 12:45 AM, Dan Haywood wrote:
Raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ISIS-1759 for this
On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 at 19:52 Dan Haywood <d...@haywood-associates.co.uk>
wrote:
Hi Erik,
I'll look into this... This doesn't sound right that this version is
creating these extra calls into the domain code.
Thx,
Dan
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, 11:35 Erik de Hair, <e.deh...@pocos.nl> wrote:
Hi,
I'm not really sure about this but it feels like our app's performance
(Apache Isis 1.15.0) is worse than before and I believe it might be
because of the fact that the getter and hide method of a property are
called both, despite the fact that the property is hidden.
We have a (derived) property (or referenced property) defined like this:
public String getX(){
return someService.createX(getY(), getZ()); // We don't want this
method to be called always, because it's an expensive one
}
public boolean hideX(){
boolean condition = ... // some condition
return condition;
}
In 1.14.0 getX() wouldn't be called if the hideX()-method returned true
and so wouldn't the expensive service-method be called. For 1.15.0 we
would have to change the implementation to something like the following
to make sure the expensive call wouldn't be executed:
public String getX(){
if(!hideConditionsForX){
return someService.createX(getY(), getZ());
}
return null;
}
public boolean hideX(){
return hideConditionsForX();
}
private boolean hideConditionsForX(){
// ... must probably be implemented using QueryResultsCache to
reduce DB-calls
}
This is also the case for referenced properties for which no DB-query
has to be executed if it was hidden. This could count up if we have a
lot of hidden properties (this might be solved with refactoring).
Am I seeing this correctly?
Erik