if you save the page to disk how big is it? johan
On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Indeed, it is a very big component hierarchy (It contains at least 3 > levels > of nested AjaxTabbedPanel components). > The application is, in fact, a single page and it uses a lot of ajax to > perform the updates. The model reflect the component hierarchy (Appliction > has a single modelObject which nests another objects corresponding to each > component). I do not have a lot of detaching logic, because it is > important > to have all the data in the model (caching), also because the services are > very costly operations. > > If this description is not enough for replication, I will be glad to help > by > giving you another details. > > Alex. > > > Martijn Dashorst wrote: > > > > How big is the page? Sounds like a really, really big component > > hierarchy. Then it sounds reasonable that the httpsession store is > > much faster: it keeps it in ram, and doesn't use serialization until > > the session is serialized (server shutting down, deciding to put > > session to disk or replication of session across cluster) iirc. > > > > I think we would appreciate some way of replicating your results. I > > assume you can't share the actual code, but could you share a spin-off > > of the page's component structure and a Model that replicates the data > > stuff's size (including the detach logic)? > > > > Martijn > > > > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> If the pages wouldn't be serializable, it wouldn't work in development > >> mode. > >> Is it right? > >> > >> I think that it is not necessarily about how large is application, in > my > >> case it is about how large is the model I'm working with for that > >> specific > >> request (ajax request). > >> > >> My action was: fetch a subview of a very large table 300x300, each cell > >> has > >> a heavy model object. > >> > >> Alex. > >> > >> > >> Johan Compagner wrote: > >> > > >> > that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here and > >> we > >> > dont notice a difference > >> > So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you > sure > >> > for > >> > example that the pages > >> > are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? > >> > > >> > johan > >> > > >> > > >> > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to give > >> up > >> >> using > >> >> SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the > >> >> application > >> >> is very slow. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Johan Compagner wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > invocation count 1?? > >> >> > > >> >> > So you only do 1 request and you profile that? > >> >> > thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the > >> same > >> >> > time > >> >> > (10 for 100 request or something like that) > >> >> > to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) > >> >> > > >> >> > johan > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of > the > >> >> >> SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the > >> Application#newSessionStore > >> >> to > >> >> >> HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application > >> >> overall > >> >> >> performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small applications, > >> but > >> >> >> when > >> >> >> it is about a large one - things changes. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a > >> profiling > >> >> of > >> >> >> an > >> >> >> action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a > >> >> profiling > >> >> >> for > >> >> >> the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The > difference > >> is > >> >> >> huge: > >> >> >> 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, but > >> I've > >> >> >> noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore to > >> the > >> >> >> HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the > >> application. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Alex. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg > >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Matej Knopp-2 wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing > >> >> >> > Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not recommended. > >> What > >> >> >> > are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the > >> session > >> >> >> > store. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -Matej > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On 9/7/07, jamieballing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want > to > >> >> >> disable > >> >> >> >> the > >> >> >> >> second level page cache. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Is there any way to do this? > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Thanks, > >> >> >> >> Jamie > >> >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> >> View this message in context: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 > >> >> >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com > . > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> >> 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] > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> View this message in context: > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 > >> >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> View this message in context: > >> >> > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 > >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> View this message in context: > >> > http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 > >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst > > Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released > > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 > Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
