And that back and forward buttons in the browser dont really work well in the HttpSessionStore
But i cant believe that the overhead he is reporting is really the overhead.. It could be an Antivirus checker or other stuff like that. Besides that if that would be a problem just get an SSD and place that into your server where you point the DiskStore to Then you will really not see any difference johan On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:07, Matej Knopp <matej.kn...@gmail.com> wrote: > There really is no good reason to use http session store instead of > secondlevelcachesessionstore unless you are experiencing performance > problems. HttpSessionStore uses more memory and keeps much shorter > history so your users will be experiencing page expiration much more > often. > > -Matej > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Eyal Golan <egola...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I read this post > > > http://ptrthomas.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/perfbench-update-tapestry-5-and-grails/ > > and he suggested to use HttpSessionStore instead of the second cache... > > > > I looked into the javadoc and the code itself and understood the > > differences. > > > > However, can anyone explain in a bit more detail the implications / > > differences of using the Http instead of the SecondLayer? > > The reason I'm asking this, is because, if it's better use, then I want > to > > convince my team that we change the implementation of our application to > use > > Http store. > > > > > > Thanks very much. > > > > Eyal Golan > > egola...@gmail.com > > > > Visit: http://jvdrums.sourceforge.net/ > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/egolan74 > > > > P Save a tree. Please don't print this e-mail unless it's really > necessary > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org > >
