It's class loader if the creation of a new locator took that long. I strongly think that is not the case. Chance is very high that your networking configuration is bad. Check the host file again, and you can also ask people who are expert in this area. I am sure it's your networking at this point.


Can you try to use the webbrowser, point to the webservice's address (do this only the first time, if want to try again, have to quit and start the browser again, else it'll be quick), and see how long does it take. Make sure to append ?WSDL to the end of your webservice address.

Again, you check your networking. You may have to ask a different group here.

As a catch all thing, nothing is definite when it comes to programming. So don't bet it all on the networking, it could be anything though.

Hrishikesh Kumar wrote:



Hi,

 Yes, the first time execution of this call will take like 6 seconds, but
the subsequest calls to this method takes just 100 milli seconds. Do you
think there is problem with classloader, if that is case please suggest me
somethings to try.

Thanks,
Hrishikesh.



Vy Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED] edu> To [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/05/2004 08:00 cc PM Subject Re: Performance issue with using Please respond to Axis [EMAIL PROTECTED] he.org





It's strange that you have problem here.  Based on my source code, the
locator does not have any static initialization, does not even have a
constructor.  Therefore, it should just return instantly after
initialize some variable.  I wonder if the classloader have problem
searching for this stuff.  What you may want to do is first, make sure
the service locator is the problem here.  Next, you can step into it to
find out what's it is doing in a debugger.  You can then test the
classloader theory by executing the webservice request twice.  The 2nd
time should be very fast since the class is already loaded by the class
loader.


Hrishikesh Kumar wrote:



We have our local host in the /etc/hosts directory

127.0.0.1               localhost.localdomain localhost
6.6.6.5                 applinux1.interact.nonreg applinux1

This is the line which is taking 5 secs:

getSubscriberDetailsLocator = new GetSubscriberDetailsServiceLocator();










V D





<[EMAIL PROTECTED]





edu> To





[EMAIL PROTECTED]





08/04/2004 10:17 cc





AM





Subject





Re: Performance issue with using





Please respond to Axis





[EMAIL PROTECTED]





he.org




















How about adding a local host entry into the host file?

Hrishikesh Kumar wrote:





We are using 1.2 Beta version on Linux with Tomcat. This is what is


giving


such high time. We tested the same 1.2 Beta same program on WINNT and it




is




working within .5 seconds. We are still working on changing the version




and




giving it a shot on Linux. I do not know about the network setting as the
testing is being done by having the client and server on the same


machine.











          Vy Ho







          <[EMAIL PROTECTED]







          edu>                                                       To







                                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]







          08/03/2004 11:08                                           cc







          PM







                                                                Subject







                                    Re: Performance issue with using







          Please respond to         Axis







          [EMAIL PROTECTED]







               he.org




















Check your network connection settings, such as hosts file, etc. Other than that, you can find a hello world tutorial for axis somewhere complete with client and server to make sure there's nothing wrong with the way you do it. 5 seconds long is just plain wrong, so definitely you're having some problem that is not soap, webservice or axis related.

Hrishikesh Kumar wrote:







Actually whatever we have written is almost as simple as a hello world
problem.
According to our initial analysis we are finding the getServiceLocator
taking like half of the turnaround time (5 secs) in our case.


























Reply via email to