The overhead incurred would of course depend on the number or requests the
app was receiving, the amount of available memory and the efficiency of the
chosen GC algorithm. I agree that object creation and collection is
relatively efficient these days, but pooling still makes sense where it can
be implemented.
I noted that Tapestry 5 has chosen to implement stateless pages and pooling
of these by default.
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Matej Knopp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 12:25 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Page pooling (for stateless pages)
Hi,
first of all, I don't really think it's worth pooling pages. I can't
imagine that page instance creation would have that much overhead.
Also stateless pages doesn't mean they don't contain any state. The
page is stateless because it's not kept between requests, but during
request there's lot going on with the page. So you can't just reuse
the instances.
-Matej
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Joel Halbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering whether it was possible to implement "pooling" of
stateless pages? Possibly using a custom PageMap implementation?
Although newer JVM's are good at performing GC, pooling is a reasonable
additional technique to use for achieving that extra bit of scalability.
If anyone has tried to do this, or has any suggestions on the best way
forward I'd be really interested to know.
Many Thanks,
Joel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
