Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
this is generally in sync with what i know about session usage. if you're using 1.3 and detachable models and so forth, 20K sessions on a reasonable box is not going to be a problem. wicket pages really are pretty small. a very complex one might be 50-100K and i've never actually seen one much over about 100K myself. and since 1.3 pages everything but the most recent page to disk, you've got maybe 50K per session. complex pages could be 80-100K, but simpler pages can also be 15K or less. if you take 50K as an average, that's 20 per MB * 1GB (1,000 MB) = 20,000. Steven Zou wrote: Hi,Maciej,really? it's so exciting. we're choosing framework now,and I prefer wicket, but the heavy session is my care. but there're some questions: (1)where you result from? Is the 20,200 reality request and not from jmeter(or other stress test tool)? (2)300MB/20,000=15KB,Does it mean only 15KB per session? I think 15KB isn't enough for only one page. (3)Would you like give us some experience for so high load web application? thanks. Maciej Andreas Bednarz wrote: Hello Jeremy, try also to disable any versioning and use read only models. I have tuned my private wicket project this way and it now supports more than 20.000 concurrent sessions on a single tomcat server. If everything in your model is serializable you can also use tomcats disk or jdbc persistence store for sessions. There is also a terracotta project, so you can cluster your wicket (1.3) application lineary. My average memory usage with 20.000 sessions in memory and very complex page structures (multiple including page object levels) is about 300MB. I think this could serve even a large community site :-) Maciej - Original Message - From: Igor Vaynberg To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7:27 AM Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket? detachable models are a must. in my experience a wicket page is only about 50kb on average. that would hardly cause an OOME on a server. 1.3 has second level session store that pages to disk, so that is something else you might want to try. once you convert to detachable models oomes should go away. there is an example in wicket-examples on stateless stuff if you need to go that far. -igor On 5/2/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user -- - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ -- ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Yeah, you can give provide a HINT that they shouldn't be stored (that they are stateless) by overriding getStatelessHint on the components you put on the page. Note that if there is just one stateful component on the page, that'll trigger the page to be marked as stateful UNLESS you explicitly mark the page itself stateless (which is a bit cheaper by the way, as it won't iterate over it's children to find out whether it is stateless). i thought even if you explicitly mark a page as stateless that has stateful components ( link, form, etc ), it would still render as stateful ( creating session ) ? isn't that the behaviour? Eelco Hillenius wrote: Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... If you're only working with stateless pages, you don't detachable models as those pages won't be stored to start with. But if you want to reuse the models and components in stateful pages, it is better to have that. Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). Yep. Normal Links, Forms, ajax requests etc. I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). Not sure what you're getting at... So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Yeah, you can give provide a HINT that they shouldn't be stored (that they are stateless) by overriding getStatelessHint on the components you put on the page. Note that if there is just one stateful component on the page, that'll trigger the page to be marked as stateful UNLESS you explicitly mark the page itself stateless (which is a bit cheaper by the way, as it won't iterate over it's children to find out whether it is stateless). The method where this all happens is Page#isPageStateless. Also, if you want to keep track of when user sessions are created, create a custom session store by overriding newSessionStore on Application and let your custom store extend HttpSessionStore or SecondLevelCacheSessionStore and then override onBind which will be called when (new) sessions are bound to the HttpSession. Eelco - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Sessionless-Wicket--tf3684664.html#a11738136 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
i thought even if you explicitly mark a page as stateless that has stateful components ( link, form, etc ), it would still render as stateful ( creating session ) ? isn't that the behaviour? yes that is true. Eelco - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Should I be concerned that the numbers in the following URLs jump so much? This is on a page signed in as an admin, where I do have some callback links that are stateful. On one page view, here is an admin link: http://www.texashuntfish.dev/thf/app?wicket:interface=:12492:list:posts:0:postSummary:delete::ILinkListener I refresh (no other page views in between), and it changes to: http://www.texashuntfish.dev/thf/app?wicket:interface=:13999:list:posts:0:postSummary:delete::ILinkListener That's an increase of 1500 in a single page view... I am concerned that somehow this means that I have 1500 components going into memory for a single page? Is that number changing so drastically something to be alarmed about? Thank you! Jeremy On 5/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... If you're only working with stateless pages, you don't detachable models as those pages won't be stored to start with. But if you want to reuse the models and components in stateful pages, it is better to have that. Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). Yep. Normal Links, Forms, ajax requests etc. I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). Not sure what you're getting at... So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Yeah, you can give provide a HINT that they shouldn't be stored (that they are stateless) by overriding getStatelessHint on the components you put on the page. Note that if there is just one stateful component on the page, that'll trigger the page to be marked as stateful UNLESS you explicitly mark the page itself stateless (which is a bit cheaper by the way, as it won't iterate over it's children to find out whether it is stateless). The method where this all happens is Page#isPageStateless. Also, if you want to keep track of when user sessions are created, create a custom session store by overriding newSessionStore on Application and let your custom store extend HttpSessionStore or SecondLevelCacheSessionStore and then override onBind which will be called when (new) sessions are bound to the HttpSession. Eelco - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
that is actually the page id not component id. so either you create 1500 pages in between, or stateless pages generate random ids - which it didnt look like from the code... -igor On 5/4/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Should I be concerned that the numbers in the following URLs jump so much? This is on a page signed in as an admin, where I do have some callback links that are stateful. On one page view, here is an admin link: http://www.texashuntfish.dev/thf/app?wicket:interface=:12492:list:posts:0:postSummary:delete::ILinkListener I refresh (no other page views in between), and it changes to: http://www.texashuntfish.dev/thf/app?wicket:interface=:13999:list:posts:0:postSummary:delete::ILinkListener That's an increase of 1500 in a single page view... I am concerned that somehow this means that I have 1500 components going into memory for a single page? Is that number changing so drastically something to be alarmed about? Thank you! Jeremy On 5/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... If you're only working with stateless pages, you don't detachable models as those pages won't be stored to start with. But if you want to reuse the models and components in stateful pages, it is better to have that. Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). Yep. Normal Links, Forms, ajax requests etc. I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). Not sure what you're getting at... So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Yeah, you can give provide a HINT that they shouldn't be stored (that they are stateless) by overriding getStatelessHint on the components you put on the page. Note that if there is just one stateful component on the page, that'll trigger the page to be marked as stateful UNLESS you explicitly mark the page itself stateless (which is a bit cheaper by the way, as it won't iterate over it's children to find out whether it is stateless). The method where this all happens is Page#isPageStateless. Also, if you want to keep track of when user sessions are created, create a custom session store by overriding newSessionStore on Application and let your custom store extend HttpSessionStore or SecondLevelCacheSessionStore and then override onBind which will be called when (new) sessions are bound to the HttpSession. Eelco - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
In 1.3 you can use stateless pages (with stateless links and stateless forms). However, you'll have to sacrifice the programming model in favor of statelessness a little. I'm not really sure it's worth it. -Matej On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Stateless pages are available even in 1.2, but much more limited. Basically, when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory. You'd have to do everything with bookmarkable pages, links and page parameters then. In 1.3, you can use some callbacks while still keeping pages stateless, e.g. using StatelessLink and StatelessForm. There's a simple example showing this in wicket-examples: org.apache.wicket.examples.stateless In your case, if really most of your app is read-only, it's probably worth using that. And finally, a big improvement in 1.3 over 1.2 is that as long as users don't have a HttpSession assigned by the server, and they are only accessing stateless pages, no session will be created by Wicket either, giving you more options in clustering and further decreasing the memory footprint. It is possible to even further optimize bits by digging deeper in Wicket, but for now, this should help quite a lot. Eelco On 5/3/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 1.3 you can use stateless pages (with stateless links and stateless forms). However, you'll have to sacrifice the programming model in favor of statelessness a little. I'm not really sure it's worth it. -Matej On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Thanks! Jeremy On 5/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stateless pages are available even in 1.2, but much more limited. Basically, when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory. You'd have to do everything with bookmarkable pages, links and page parameters then. In 1.3, you can use some callbacks while still keeping pages stateless, e.g. using StatelessLink and StatelessForm. There's a simple example showing this in wicket-examples: org.apache.wicket.examples.stateless In your case, if really most of your app is read-only, it's probably worth using that. And finally, a big improvement in 1.3 over 1.2 is that as long as users don't have a HttpSession assigned by the server, and they are only accessing stateless pages, no session will be created by Wicket either, giving you more options in clustering and further decreasing the memory footprint. It is possible to even further optimize bits by digging deeper in Wicket, but for now, this should help quite a lot. Eelco On 5/3/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 1.3 you can use stateless pages (with stateless links and stateless forms). However, you'll have to sacrifice the programming model in favor of statelessness a little. I'm not really sure it's worth it. -Matej On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
please we need something in wicket-examples on this wicket stateless best pratice cuz it still kind of not easy pulling the whole stuff together at times. it would be nice to have some 4-page example that shows best practices for stateless arch. thanks On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Thanks! Jeremy On 5/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stateless pages are available even in 1.2, but much more limited. Basically, when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory. You'd have to do everything with bookmarkable pages, links and page parameters then. In 1.3, you can use some callbacks while still keeping pages stateless, e.g. using StatelessLink and StatelessForm. There's a simple example showing this in wicket-examples: org.apache.wicket.examples.stateless In your case, if really most of your app is read-only, it's probably worth using that. And finally, a big improvement in 1.3 over 1.2 is that as long as users don't have a HttpSession assigned by the server, and they are only accessing stateless pages, no session will be created by Wicket either, giving you more options in clustering and further decreasing the memory footprint. It is possible to even further optimize bits by digging deeper in Wicket, but for now, this should help quite a lot. Eelco On 5/3/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 1.3 you can use stateless pages (with stateless links and stateless forms). However, you'll have to sacrifice the programming model in favor of statelessness a little. I'm not really sure it's worth it. -Matej On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... If you're only working with stateless pages, you don't detachable models as those pages won't be stored to start with. But if you want to reuse the models and components in stateful pages, it is better to have that. Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). Yep. Normal Links, Forms, ajax requests etc. I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). Not sure what you're getting at... So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Yeah, you can give provide a HINT that they shouldn't be stored (that they are stateless) by overriding getStatelessHint on the components you put on the page. Note that if there is just one stateful component on the page, that'll trigger the page to be marked as stateful UNLESS you explicitly mark the page itself stateless (which is a bit cheaper by the way, as it won't iterate over it's children to find out whether it is stateless). The method where this all happens is Page#isPageStateless. Also, if you want to keep track of when user sessions are created, create a custom session store by overriding newSessionStore on Application and let your custom store extend HttpSessionStore or SecondLevelCacheSessionStore and then override onBind which will be called when (new) sessions are bound to the HttpSession. Eelco - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
There already is an example though. Take a look at org.apache.wicket.examples.stateless. If you have suggestions (patches) to extend that example even more, that'd be great, but there's really not that much to say about it I think. Eelco On 5/3/07, Ayodeji Aladejebi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: please we need something in wicket-examples on this wicket stateless best pratice cuz it still kind of not easy pulling the whole stuff together at times. it would be nice to have some 4-page example that shows best practices for stateless arch. thanks On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to everyone for their help - I'm starting right away to convert everything to detachable models for all domain objects that are loaded into components... Eelco, I am curious about your statement when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory... Most of my pages have no callbacks (by callback, I'm assuming that you mean a link that would have reference to wicket components in the URL, meaning that it is storing the state of that component so that it can further interact with it). I have taken great care to control the URLs of the application, so almost every page has only components that have standard URLs, with no references to any components, etc. The forms will obviously have a call back, and certain links (particularly if you are signed in as an administrator - a lot of links appear to edit and delete content that are all direct callbacks with obviously no direct URL encoding / decoding so that you can not use them outside of your session). So, how do I know if it's storing the pages in memory? Is there something I can do to tell it not to? Thanks! Jeremy On 5/3/07, Eelco Hillenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stateless pages are available even in 1.2, but much more limited. Basically, when you have no callbacks, you're page will be stateless and not kept in memory. You'd have to do everything with bookmarkable pages, links and page parameters then. In 1.3, you can use some callbacks while still keeping pages stateless, e.g. using StatelessLink and StatelessForm. There's a simple example showing this in wicket-examples: org.apache.wicket.examples.stateless In your case, if really most of your app is read-only, it's probably worth using that. And finally, a big improvement in 1.3 over 1.2 is that as long as users don't have a HttpSession assigned by the server, and they are only accessing stateless pages, no session will be created by Wicket either, giving you more options in clustering and further decreasing the memory footprint. It is possible to even further optimize bits by digging deeper in Wicket, but for now, this should help quite a lot. Eelco On 5/3/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In 1.3 you can use stateless pages (with stateless links and stateless forms). However, you'll have to sacrifice the programming model in favor of statelessness a little. I'm not really sure it's worth it. -Matej On 5/3/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2
[Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
detachable models are a must. in my experience a wicket page is only about 50kb on average. that would hardly cause an OOME on a server. 1.3 has second level session store that pages to disk, so that is something else you might want to try. once you convert to detachable models oomes should go away. there is an example in wicket-examples on stateless stuff if you need to go that far. -igor On 5/2/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
Hello Jeremy, try also to disable any versioning and use read only models. I have tuned my private wicket project this way and it now supports more than 20.000 concurrent sessions on a single tomcat server. If everything in your model is serializable you can also use tomcats disk or jdbc persistence store for sessions. There is also a terracotta project, so you can cluster your wicket (1.3) application lineary. My average memory usage with 20.000 sessions in memory and very complex page structures (multiple including page object levels) is about 300MB. I think this could serve even a large community site :-) Maciej - Original Message - From: Igor Vaynberg To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7:27 AM Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket? detachable models are a must. in my experience a wicket page is only about 50kb on average. that would hardly cause an OOME on a server. 1.3 has second level session store that pages to disk, so that is something else you might want to try. once you convert to detachable models oomes should go away. there is an example in wicket-examples on stateless stuff if you need to go that far. -igor On 5/2/07, Jeremy Thomerson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and almost all of it is state-less data The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you have signed in. We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages and components I now believe we should have used detachable models for many things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory? Any other suggestions? Thank you! Jeremy Thomerson texashuntfish.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user -- - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ -- ___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/___ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
