Max Starets píše v Út 01. 12. 2009 v 20:42 -0500: > Gabrielle, > > I think the main advantage of using application view cache is that state > saving/view root caching is done once for a particular page > within an application (that only applies to pages displayed in response > to a GET request). > > Since we have seen some issues with the current implementation, I would > vote for not supporting application view cache > in Trinidad 2. Partial state saving should make its benefits much less > tangible. Yes, I did some profiling few moths ago before we migrated to JSF 2.0 state saving and I can confirm that same very complex view written:
- as .jspx + trinidad state saving + trinidad components + application view cache - and as .xhtml + mojarra partial state saving + base JSF components doesn't have performance problem (even no regression with .xhtml) in both cases regarding state saving. +1 for removing application view cache in trinidad 2.0 Regards, Martin Kočí If there is demand for this feature in the future, > we can revisit it and try to address the issues we have seen. > > Max > > > > Gabrielle Crawford wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm working on state saving issues in Trinidad 2 (for JSF 2). I'm just > > wondering if we really want to support application view cache going > > forward. > > > > The application view cache has some limitations that make me wonder > > how commonly it's used, see the doc under "The Application View Cache" > > http://myfaces.apache.org/trinidad/trinidad-1_2/devguide/configuration.html > > > > > > Maybe more importantly, I'm not sure, but I think the reason it exists > > is to avoid rerunning the tags? Is rerunning tags as much of an issue > > with facelets? If not, maybe we should just say to move to facelets in > > 2.0. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Gabrielle > > > > > > > >
