[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I think it would be good to get the information below into jira issue. If you could check the jira search below to see if there is another issue that is similar before creating a new one that would be great. If there is not another issue that is similar please add a new one. http://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=truequery=performancesummary=truedescription=truepid=10071status=1status=3status=4 Thanks alot, Jay View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4121433#4121433 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4121433 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Would it make sense to create a jira issue for this? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4121427#4121427 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4121427 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Hi, Do You have any news on this performance issue? We are currently using Seam 1.2 and have enough performance issues as it is, so an upgrade to Seam 2.0 is out of the question until we can be sure that the performance is significantly better than in version 1.2. Thanks! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4120760#4120760 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4120760 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Unfortunately no - I have been working on interoperability with OC4J, Weblogic, and websphere. We will be reviewing priorities and planned tests in the next several weeks. I will carry on your concern. Rest assured that performance baselines and benchmarks are among the top of the priorities. Thanks, Jay View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4120894#4120894 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4120894 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance issue with respect to Seam intercepts
Have you tried @BypassInterceptors on your bean? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4120614#4120614 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4120614 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance issue with respect to Seam intercepts
Thank you so much!! I totally missed this in the docs!! This did the trick completely! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4120690#4120690 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4120690 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : These are surprising results for me as well. I will review them and compare with our own servers. | | I will be adding more tests and comparisons in regards to performance to the Seam project as time goes on. I appreciate your work on this. | Hi Jay, It would be nice if after sorting this out an official article about Seam performance was posted. The old article listed at the beginning of this thread is... somewhat old. And there is much need in more fresh and official info on Seam performance for it to be taken more seriously by enterprises. Thanks again, I am really glad Red Hat/JBoss team has picked this issue that quickly! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4112390#4112390 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4112390 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
The debug mode for Seam would have a significant impact on your stats. Have you set the debug mode for Seam to false? In components.xml, try adding: core:init debug=false / View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111870#4111870 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111870 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Hi lowecg2004, Thanks for the tip. Just modified the jpa-no-a4j.ear application adding : anonymous wrote : core:init debug=false / But same results than before (looking at Seam code, debug=false is the default value). So, for a constant throughput of 60tx/s, I have the following results : cpu used=40% elapsed(ms)=94ms for a 5 minute long load-test. Thanks you once more anyway ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111947#4111947 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111947 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
So Monday
Hello !
Here is some more information about the load tests we executed.
If you want more information please tell me. Also, if you have an idea on how
we can achieve betters results, I'm interested (of course !).
Otherwise I think you can find some interesting comparative and instructive (ar
least for me !) performance results.
Please note, I'm really far from being a bench expert or a system expert - I'm
only a humble little developper so once more please - if anyone sees some
interesting optimization to apply just tell me !
Also, those tests were made on a simple application and are not representative
for application in production environment
(we didnt' have time to code one for each framework :)).
Extract
From our test:
. Seam consumes 3 times (really average) more cpu than the same app with plain
jsf.
. JSF consumes 3 times (really average) more than plain old Struts like app.
I would have really expected at the beginning a performance ratio of 2 times
more for Seam app that Struts like but it's like 10 !
arrrggh !
I - Test Environment
1. Injector platform used :
Pentium IV 3 GHz, 2 Go RAM.
Windows XP Professional SP1 with JMeter 2.3.
2. App Server
Websphere 6.1.0.13
IBM JRE 5.0 SR6 64bits
(Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build
pap64devifx-20071025 (SR6b)).
sxqwas02 : 6 Processors 2.1 GHz Power PC5
40894464 Ko
One JVM
No clustering and no session replication.
JVM Parameters
Initial Heap Size = 256 Mo
Max Heap Size = 512 Mo
Web Container Threads =
Session Timeout = 4 minutes
JDBC Pool = {connectionTimeout=60s, maxConnections=10, minConnections=5,
reapTime=60, unusedTimeout=120, aged=0}
Threadpool : minSize = 5,maxSize = 20
3. Web Server
IBM HTTP Server 6.1.0.5
CPU : 1 proc 2812.972 MHz
Dual-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 8220 SE
RAM : 1025372 Ko
IHS Parameters
Timeout 300
KeepAlive On
MaxKeepAliveRequests 100
KeepAliveTimeout 15
StartServers 5
MaxClients 150
MinSpareThreads 5
MaxSpareThreads 10
ThreadsPerChild 25
MaxRequestsPerChild 1
II - Test scenario
1. Scenario
User uses jpa sample application bundled with Seam.
All vusers execute the following scenario in loop :
1. go to page /jpa/home.seam
2. loggin
user=demo
pass=demo
3. user press the 'Find Hotel' button
(no search criteria and max results=10).
4. user selects first record in the list
5. user books this hotel
6. user enters booking information
7. user confirms his reservation
8. user cancels his reservation.
2. mesurement points
All version of the application were tested with 15tx/s, 30tx/s, 60tx/s,
120tx/s, 240tx/s.
3. Ramp up period/think time, vuser count, etc...
No think time.
No Ramp up period (we used a constant throughput timer in JMeter to limit the
number of request to 15, 30, ...tx/s) depending on the scenario.
4. Applications tested
a. jpa sample modified to remove a4j and RichFaces components libraries.
uses SUN RI 1.2 (bundled with Seam), facelets, Seam 2.0.0.GA
name:jpa-no-a4j.ear
same as jpa from Seam except rich*.jar removed, el-impl.jar added (if
it wasn't already there).
b. jpa sample modified to remove Seam, include Spring for business Layer.
uses SUN RI 1.2, facelets, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf-facelets.ear
c. jpa sample modified to remove Seam and facelets, include Spring for business
Layer.
uses SUN RI 1.2, JSP, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf-sun-1.2.ear
d. jpa sample modified to remove Seam and facelets, include Spring for business
Layer.
uses IBM JSF (1.1), JSP, Spring (bundled with Seam 2.0.0.GA)
name:jpa-standard-jsf.ear
e. another demo application which runs with a Struts like framework.
name:demo.ear
5. Notes
Please, note that when we removed Seam, we put hotel list in request scope, not
in session scope.
Note also log level was at WARN (so no logs after startup during test
execution).
III Results
Result data was retrieved from :
a. JMeter Summary Report (tx/s, page size).
b. topas (cpu usage).
c. Wily Introscope (hea size, session size)
1. Test with 15tx/s
Scenario tx/s CPU used(%) el time moy (ms)page
size (ko) session size (ko) bytes used in heap (Mo)
| jpa-no-a4j.ear 15 10 87
5,8 181,4
244,3
| jpa-standard-jsf-facelets.ear
| 15 449
6,2 81,1 NA
| jpa-standard-jsf.ear
| 15 4 47
6,2 2,0220
| jpa-standard-jsf-sun-1.2.ear
| 15 4,5
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
These are surprising results for me as well. I will review them and compare with our own servers. I will be adding more tests and comparisons in regards to performance to the Seam project as time goes on. I appreciate your work on this. Thanks, -Jay JBoss Seam QE. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111749#4111749 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111749 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Thank you very much for your concern Jay, I'm looking forward for any news you might have on this subject - whatever it would be (configuration change, code change or just different results than me). I'll also be very interested about your performance results between plain jsf and seam if you make such tests. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111849#4111849 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111849 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Do your tests use JBoss microcontainer in all cases? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111022#4111022 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111022 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
There is also somewhat older article from JBoss about Seam performance, might be interesting as reference information: http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/jbossworld_2006_june_jaffe.pdf View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111025#4111025 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111025 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
Never in fact. Why ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111026#4111026 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111026 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. But since you didn't use MC I can't comment on your numbers (I am not a performance tuning expert). Was the JSF (without Seam) application a 'full' equivalent of a Seam application? I don't have hard numbers but in my case I had performance improved (didn't need to measure to see improvement) a lot mostly due to moving lot's of stuff from request (session scope was not acceptable) scope (JSF application) to conversation scope which reduced amount of database trips a lot. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111031#4111031 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111031 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
svadu wrote : I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. I really don't see how MC would explain performance gain between plain jsf and seam. But I've never used MC. Could you explain MC benefits for my use case ? svadu wrote : Was the JSF (without Seam) application a 'full' equivalent of a Seam application? Yes, I've just removed Seam from the spring sample which is included in Seam 2.0.0 GA distribution. svadu wrote : I don't have hard numbers but in my case I had performance improved (didn't need to measure to see improvement) a lot mostly due to moving lot's of stuff from request (session scope was not acceptable) scope (JSF application) to conversation scope which reduced amount of database trips a lot. I fully agree that it would increase my performance if I was using session replication in db. But since I'm not using session replication and I don't have session size problems, i don't see the benefits. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111033#4111033 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111033 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
gonzalad wrote : svadu wrote : I wouldn't be surprised if you don't get very high performance using microcontainer because you're not using full JEE capabilities of application server. | I really don't see how MC would explain performance gain between plain jsf and seam. But I've never used MC. Could you explain MC benefits for my use case ? I didn't mean that MC would give you performance benefits :) I think if you prepare more details (as you mentioned in the original post) it's likely Seam team will be interested in your case... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111036#4111036 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111036 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
I'll send more info on Monday then. Have a good week end and thanks for your help ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111038#4111038 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111038 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance vs plain JSF
svadu wrote : There is also somewhat older article from JBoss about Seam performance, might be interesting as reference information: http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/jbossworld_2006_june_jaffe.pdf Thanks for this review, I've already looked at it, but read it once more (in case of..). But doesn't help ;(( page 24 short think time : in fact all vusers involved in all tests had no think time. logging : no log in any my tests (only at startup). client vs server state : server state always used (session size was 180 ko ouch ! for all tests). no ejb : so no call by value problem vusers where between 5 and 15. no load balancing no session replication and no .css or .js or image requested from my vusers ! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4111032#4111032 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4111032 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
gus888 - I don't completely understand what you are after, but if you are in an long running conversation, then if you try to begin another you will get an exception unless you use join=true. If you always want to rejoin an existing conversation when you hit @Begin, then just add join=true. Or design your application so that a user can never hit a @Begin from inside a conversation (certainly possible to do). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4098386#4098386 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4098386 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
rdewell wrote : Our primary scope types are EVENT and SESSION. We were early
adopters, and conversations just never worked quite right for us, so we didn't
look back.
Are there any others who made long-running conversations work in production
environment?
We also have a main problem on long running conversations:
If a user @Begin a conversation, he doesn't finish the whole conversation by
@End the conversation, but he @Begin another long-running conversation (this
happens in production), then system will through exception like below from
ConversationInterceptor this:javax.ejb.EJBTransactionRolledbackException:
begin method invoked from a long running conversation, try using
@Begin(join=true) on method: createInstance
Based on I understand about the long-running conversation from Seam docs, click
on @Begin with a id, system will check the existing conversations, if found,
system will recover the conversation, otherwise, system will invoke a new
conversation with the given id. @Begin without a id, system always invoke a new
conversation with a new id. I don't know whether we can remove the following
code from ConversationInterceptor: if ( isMissingJoin(method) )
| {
|throw new IllegalStateException(begin method invoked from a
long running conversation, try using @Begin(join=true) on method: +
method.getName());
| }
| Thank you very much, Seam team.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4096194#4096194
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4096194
___
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
I'd like to second that. Getting that There should only be one Seam phase listener per application is not really helpful, since jboss-seam.jar should be placed in the EAR, not in the WAR. So with more than one SEAM application on the server you get that message because of the UCL. Or is Seam only supporting the scoped deployment model on JBoss? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4095317#4095317 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4095317 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
We strongly recommend scoped deployment, yes. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4095324#4095324 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4095324 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam Performance
I'm not sure anyone can advise you. You don't specify what hardware you're running, how much bandwidth you have coming into the server, what you're doing with the upload. Heck what do you mean by big upload? 1M? 1G? 10G? 1T? What's the JBoss setup? There's a lot of questions to be answered before someone can answer your question. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4080141#4080141 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4080141 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
How do I set ajax4jsf forceparser to false with Seam 2.0? There used to be ajax4jsf filter but not anymore. I want to disable ajax4jsf tidying up output on each request. With older Seam version I could do this... | + filter | + display-nameAjax4jsf Filter/display-name | + filter-nameajax4jsf/filter-name | + filter-classorg.ajax4jsf.Filter/filter-class | + init-param | + param-nameforceparser/param-name | + param-valuefalse/param-value | + /init-param | + /filter | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4067161#4067161 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4067161 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
@mgrouch:
How do you cache JNDI lookups?
I only have this in my components.xml. What would I have to add? Thanks!
core:init
| jndi-pattern=nmp/#{ejbName}/local
| debug=true/
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4067174#4067174
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4067174
___
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Look at web-2.0.xsd View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4067176#4067176 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4067176 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
What are your config values for Ajax4Jsf's 'forceparse' in web.xml and Seam 'debug' in components.xml: core:init debug=false ? I believe that by default, every request is routed through a Tidy filter, even for non-Ajax pages. forceparse = false will ensure that only Ajax requests go through the tidy process. Make sure debug = false as Seam will reload pages.xml and other resources on each page request which on my machine adds 50ms or so to each request. Between the struts and seam scenarios I assume you are using the identical JVM versions/parameters? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057377#4057377 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057377 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Can you change JSF setting to 'server' side state saving (in web.xml) and try the tests again? With myfaces and these suggestions http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/Performance it had dramatic effect. I haven't tried with Sun's JSF 1.2, but client side state saving should have negative impact on performance. Are you using facelets? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057090#4057090 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057090 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Another thing:
JSF doesn't (in base components) let you to define a variable on a page.
So people quite often would write something like
#{hashMapBean[key].prop}
in many places on the page, which in fact leads to looking up hashMap many
times + using reflection to access property.
JSF also has several (6) stages of processing the question and it operates on
a tree of JSF components on these stages which also slowing things down.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057091#4057091
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057091
___
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
And in your case you should migrate to MyFaces 1.1.5 and Tomahawk 1.1.6. MyFaces 1.1.3 is too broken anyway to be used in production. It would be interesting to compare Myfaces 1.1.5 performance vs Sun's JSF 1.2 (with server side state for both) and see who wins... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057093#4057093 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057093 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Thanks for your reply. I am using server side states saving, and we don't have hashmap lookup in our pages. We can't migrate to MyFaces 1.1.5 and Tomahawk 1.1.6 due to compatibility problem with seam 1.2.1. Also, MyFaces 1.1.5 doesn't work well with Seam 1.3. So basically we can't change our environment just yet. Sad! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057099#4057099 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057099 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Try using one transaction per page load (preferably with one EJB call in case of CMT). You might have to use wrapper transfer objects (which are considered not necessary nowadays) to wrap entities of different types. This made big difference in my case. Do not forget to cache JNDI lookups. See also other people experience here: http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopict=105674 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057136#4057136 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057136 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
And local EJB interfaces vs remote ones to reduce serialization. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057131#4057131 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057131 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
Have you trieed Sun's JSF 1.2? Seam 1.3.0.A is pretty good and 1.3.0 should be out soon... You also should use facelets instead of JSPs. Tomahawk immediate=true helps a bit too on forms where you do not need validation. Hibernate caching should be used. Reduce number of complicated EL expressions per page (cause they are evaluated using reflexion). Use AJAX, bit not over do it (for things which can be done purely on client side you should do it on client side). Use client side validation if you can. Try to find out with http://facestrace.sourceforge.net/ which phase takes longest and try to improve it. Profiling should give better picture. Reduce logging and IO. Use java StringBuilder instead of StringBuffer. Minimize string concatenation, and improve other string manipulations. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057130#4057130 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057130 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
And more ideas: Native IO on app server, JRockit JVM. Give JVM higher memory settings. Use factories for stateless objects such as DAOs (so they are created once and not repeteadly created/destroyed). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057134#4057134 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057134 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
I think you would want to run your app with a profiler and find out, empirically, where your app is spending its time. I think most commercial profilers have trial versions, and there are a variety of ways to do this. Your app design based on Seam/JSF is no doubt quite different than it was with Struts. I suspect that when you compare two very well designed apps built with Seam and Struts, the Seam app will be somewhat slower. But not 10x. That sounds like an application issue. Beware of blindly trying things that might improve performance. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057156#4057156 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057156 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance concerns
mgrouch wrote : Use factories for stateless objects such as DAOs (so they are created once and not repeteadly created/destroyed). | | ... | Do not forget to cache JNDI lookups. | Again, you can certainly spend time doing this kind of stuff on the off chance that it will improve performance. More likely you'll find that in modern JVMs, object creation for short lived objects is essentially free, and JNDI lookups (btw, you're using Seam, right? Where are you directly interacting with JNDI anyway?) aren't going to be significant. Spend some time with a profiler an find out what's going on. It's irrefutable, and will show you where you should spend effort optimizing. You may find that there are performance issues with Seam. You'll also find that if you can clearly show the issue, the Seam team will be extremely responsive in addressing these. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4057157#4057157 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4057157 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance (NOT an issue)
Interesting, thanks for the feedback! :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4036886#4036886 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4036886 ___ jboss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance (NOT an issue)
Nice to see Seam working well :) Made an interesting read! View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4034294#4034294 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4034294 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
We're using it on light test-level volume now to run about 40k / month in sales. This includes the management back-end to setup products / manage customers, etc. Performance is fine, but then we aren't using some of the potentially heavyweight Seam features like conversations. Our primary scope types are EVENT and SESSION. We were early adopters, and conversations just never worked quite right for us, so we didn't look back. They would be nice to use in some cases, but our workflows are simple enough that having the state in hidden fields is sufficient. Still, Seam is the most wonderful way to develop JSF apps in general. Right now we are deploying two Seam WARs into one EAR. One WAR is the order site, and the other WAR is the management tool. The only annoying thing about this setup is that Seam always WARNs on startup, There should only be one Seam phase listener per application, and I always worry about future side effects of that warning. Having 2 Seam WARs in the same EAR doesn't really seem that exotic. Ryan View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4002370#4002370 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4002370 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Seam performance
On the second question, it almost never makes sense to have EJBs on a separate tier from the web application. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4002067#4002067 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bbop=postingmode=replyp=4002067 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
