The second level cache is disabled now - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5554
Martin Grigorov Wicket Training and Consulting On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>wrote: > More opinions here ? > > Martin Grigorov > Wicket Training and Consulting > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Sven Meier <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> I think this is the right direction. In the long term we should revisit >> some decisions/relicts of storing pages in Wicket. >> >> Sven >> >> >> On 04/04/2014 03:19 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote: >> >>> Hi Guillaume, >>> >>> We have also disabled the second level cache for our main application for >>> the time being. >>> >>> Maybe we should set 0 as the default cache size for 6.15.0 and explain >>> this >>> in the announcement + a blog + some tweets ? >>> If an application wants to use the second level cache then it should >>> enable >>> it explicitly. >>> >>> What other Wicket devs/users think ? >>> >>> Martin Grigorov >>> Wicket Training and Consulting >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Guillaume Smet <[email protected] >>> >wrote: >>> >>> Hi Martin, >>>> >>>> Some feedback you might find useful about this. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> A workaround to avoid the slowness caused by this is to set 0 or >>>>> negative >>>>> value to org.apache.wicket.settings.StoreSettings#setInmemoryCacheSize >>>>> >>>> We have a quite big application which was slow under load without us >>>> being able to find the culprit. >>>> >>>> I set the InmemoryCacheSize to 0 yesterday and the application is now >>>> much more reactive. >>>> >>>> We use a lot the disk data store as we have back links nearly >>>> everywhere and clicking back isn't slower than before. Probably >>>> because we couldn't set the cache too high due to memory issues and we >>>> probably have too many users to have an effective inmemorycache with >>>> the size we configured. >>>> >>>> Might be useful to spread the word about it. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your post on this subject. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Guillaume >>>> >>>> >> >
