|
Your right - if the project will involve showing a 200 row
table to users ten times a second. Any medium to small sized
website should first consider JSF's ability to reduce bugs and development time,
rather than worry about pages showing 50ms slower. If users are
hitting your website fast, count on your backend portion (i.e. SQL
queries) being the area that needs to be addressed
first.
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2006 5:11
PM
Subject: JSF Performance Problems
I grabbed the attachments from the original performance bug https://javaserverfaces.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3
and ran some JMeter tests against the "JSP only" and the JSF versions. The
pages are really simple, the JSP version outputs a page which is visually
identical to the JSF page. The table in question had 10 columns and 50 - 200
rows. Not a huge amount of data. I used MyFaces 1.1.3 as the JSF
implementation and ran the test in JBoss 4.0.4 GA running on JDK 1.4.2. Here's
the results:
Table Rows Average [ms] Median [ms] Hits / Min Samples
JSF Testcase 50 36 30 1300 5007
JSP Testcase 50 14 10 4030 5001
JSF Testcase 100 56 60 1050 5001
JSP Testcase 100 21 20 2700 5001
JSF Testcase 200 100 100 590 5001
JSP Testcase 200 26 30 2170 5001
This data confirms the discussion in the sun forum. The JSF version
started out nearly three times slower than the JSP page. The relative
performance of the JSF version degraded to nearly four times slower as table
rows were added. So if you are thinking about adopting JSF you should be aware
of the performance hit and make sure that you can architect around the problem
or get the performance benchmarks adjusted. Perceived performance is important
in real life projects so it's more than a theoretical problem. I'd also like
to know if anybody has ideas or code samples that make JSF perform better?
View this message in context: JSF
Performance Problems
Sent from the MyFaces - Users
forum at Nabble.com.
|
