I have found an issue with implementing the _object member as a
SequenceHashtable. In one of my objects I override the hashCode method. For
some reason that was wrecking havac with the object lookup. Castor kept
throwing the following exception, IllegalArgumentException("ObjectEntry to
be rehash i
Stephen,
When you implement a custom hashCode, you must make sure that it always
returns the same value any time the method is called during an single
instance of an application. The value can change each time the
application is executed, but during a particular instance, the value
returned need
This one time, at band camp, Stephen Ince said:
SI>I have found an issue with implementing the _object member as a
SI>SequenceHashtable. In one of my objects I override the hashCode method. For
SI>some reason that was wrecking havac with the object lookup. Castor kept
SI>throwing the following ex
This one time, at band camp, Stephen Ince said:
SI>I have attached a performance fix for castor using jdk1.3.1. The
SI>org.exolab.castor.persist.TransactionContext was using a Vector to store
SI>objects. The instance variable _objects is now of type
SI>org.apache.turbine.util.SequencedHashtable.
Bruce Snyder wrote:
>
> This one time, at band camp, Stephen Ince said:
>
> SI>I just included one file org.apache.turbine.util.SequencedHashtable. It
> SI>didn't have any dependencies. I didn't use a SequencedHashMap because it
> SI>uses Iterator and not an Enumeration. I wanted to minimiz
Not a bad idea. I was going to do the same. This way you won't have to worry
about compatibility issues.
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [castor
This one time, at band camp, Stephen Ince said:
SI>I just included one file org.apache.turbine.util.SequencedHashtable. It
SI>didn't have any dependencies. I didn't use a SequencedHashMap because it
SI>uses Iterator and not an Enumeration. I wanted to minimize the code impact.
SI>I also didn't
or not.
For complex dependencies I will normally use genjar to figure that out.
Steve
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] performance patch for Tra
I have attached
a performance fix for castor using jdk1.3.1.
Theorg.exolab.castor.persist.TransactionContext was using a Vector to
storeobjects. The instance variable _objects is now of
typeorg.apache.turbine.util.SequencedHashtable. The objects can be retreived
inorder and removed using h
I have attached a performance fix for castor using jdk1.3.1. The
org.exolab.castor.persist.TransactionContext was using a Vector to store
objects. The instance variable _objects is now of type
org.apache.turbine.util.SequencedHashtable. The objects can be retreived in
order and removed using hasht
Hi all,
i have following problem:
I have an entity name AspectDependentTest with following mapping file:
Title: Performance tips
I'm looking for any tips that would increase the marshalling/unmarshalling time of castor.. My current process has castor mashalling to a Document which is then fed into FOP to generate a PDF file. I'm profiling this process and finding that its taking ~500ms to mars
I wonder if someone has encountered this performance problem in using Castor in
a J2EE container.
Castor 0.9.4.3: unmarshalling a large message (> 200 tags) using mapping files.
Everything runs pretty fine in a standalone test app (main()) and performance
is reasonable (66 ms) per call.
After it
I'm considering building clustering on top of Castor. Any advice? Previous
messages in this thread suggested some ideas. Have they been deployed?
In a large high-volume production cluster? Successfully?
It worries me that the released Castor code doesn't support cache
invalidation.
I'm selecting
This is now being tracked here:
http://bugzilla.exolab.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215
Thanks,
--Keith
Dean_D_Hiller wrote:
>
> This one is fully tested, no added failures from CTF...
>
> A quick fix to double your performance if you are using 1000 classes like I
> am. Please let me know when thi
thanks keith,
Dean
Keith Visco wrote:
Hi Dean,
I took a quick look at your patch, it looks reasonable..., we may need
to change the key to include the namespace in the future, but since the
current default resolver is not using the namespace it's not needed
right away.
I'll get this into
Hi Dean,
I took a quick look at your patch, it looks reasonable..., we may need
to change the key to include the namespace in the future, but since the
current default resolver is not using the namespace it's not needed
right away.
I'll get this into the CVS.
--Keith
Dean_D_Hiller wrote:
>
>
Dennis,
thanks for the tip, looking at my test case code, I only called Unmarshaller.setValidation(false);
This did not improve the performance of the unmarshaller. Only my changes
did by swapping in a new XMLParser and some other minor changes. Low and
behold as I look them up I can't
Dean Hiller wrote:
here is one of the messages. I do now have VP approval to give code.
I just need to dig it up sometime. I have not gotten around to
narrowing what caused the hit down. I just have a fix. When I work
on it again, I will send you the code. I don't have the time to dig
i
here is one of the messages. I do now have VP approval to give code. I
just need to dig it up sometime. I have not gotten around to narrowing what
caused the hit down. I just have a fix. When I work on it again, I will
send you the code. I don't have the time to dig it up right now and I
Hi Dean,
I've looked at Castor performance from a larger perspective (not trying
to pinpoint where it's slow, just comparing it to other approaches). I
haven't seen speed differences of the sort you're talking about between
marshalling and unmarshalling - in my tests the marshalling is about 2-
so Gentelmen
anyone knows solution how to improve performance with Castor + JBOSS ?
maybe it's a parser problem (jboss using different parser than castor) ...??
i'll be grateful
DANNY
---
my earlier post about performance problem -
ince
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 10:35
PM
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
cache in a clustered environment
Thomas,I have a modified version of castor that
provides the ability to expire asingle object, or a class of objects, from
the performance
12:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [castor-dev] Performance cache in a clustered environment
Hi,
> Got the below from a previous post on Thu, 16 Aug 2001 01:37:32 -0700 by
Tim Fox:
>
> We're considering building clustering on top of castor using JMS - just in
the ideas stage at the
ine-De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Envoyé : jeudi 18 avril 2002
09:26À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]Objet : Re:
[castor-dev] Performance Issue JDO (repost sorta)
I all ready raised the issue, even tried to fix the problem
but ended up banging my head against the wall.
PROTECTED]From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Date: 04/08/2002 03:14PMSubject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance Issue JDO (repost sorta)After using a couple of days at work trying to make required changes to org.exolab.castor.jdo.engine.SQLEngine to solve this issue I have run out of time for now. Boss insists i continue
I have a database that contains three tables :
- arch : 2 records
- epic : 1 records
- arch_epic : 3 records that are links between my two tables ARCH
and EPIC...
When i make a simple request using JDO such as ¨Select e From EPIC e",
it take 28s to jdo for reading the first record.
Has anybody done some performance measurements with the xml binding of
castor for a large number of records (> 10)?
We are thinking of using Castor to create JAVA-Objects from XML-Files. This
XML-Files will contain a large number of records (> 100 000), each record
will have
about 25 attribut
I have been trying to solve this myself, but seem to have bit off more than i can chew. - In buildFinder the ClassDecriptor apears to contain FieldDescriptors that are not instances of JDOFieldDescriptor in some cases (Running test Harness), this makes a bit difficult to build queries since I need
ent: jeudi 28 mars 2002 7:00
To: Benjamin Voiturier
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance Issue JDO (repost sorta)
This one time, at band camp, Benjamin Voiturier said:
BV>If the database is populated as to have a parent with 100 childA, 100
BV>childB and 100 childC, a select clause like
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: vendredi 15 mars 2002 11:51
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [castor-dev] Performance Issue JDO (repost sorta)
There seems to be a problem with the way querry builder constructs
querries.
Considder this example:
Instance of Class Parent h
There seems to be a problem with the way querry builder constructs
querries.
Considder this example:
Instance of Class Parent has
- 1000 Class ChildA instances and
- 1000 Class ChildB instances.
JDO retrieves objects in one querry, the querrys resultset will contain 1 x
1000 x 1000 rows (lazy l
Hi,
I’ve a critical performance problem while loading an
object containing several 1:m relations to other
objects. The generated SQL performs a recursive LEFT OUTER JOIN for each collections
found in the object.
For instance, If object A references 2 collections, one of
objects A1 a
Hello!
Are there any performance tests for Castor-JDO available? I would like to know the
difference concerning the performance between a application which runs with JDO and
the same application which uses only JDBC.
Of course the object relational framework will steal some performance, but ho
>I haven't look at this (yet), but what is the failure that occurs when
>its redefined? Object is store multiple times in the hashmap?
>
>General question; Castor needs to support jdk1.1 right? Is that one
>reason vector is used? (Beyond if synchronization is needed there)
Castor JDO doesn't s
--- florian ramillien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually, I don't know methods to get a constant unique identifier for
> a Object. But we can use a unique identifier for Persistent object. This
> is 'object's class' + 'primary key'. So perhaps we can use this as key
> for the Hashtable ?
Does
Ned Wolpert a écrit :
>
> On Thu, 2001-12-20 at 11:24, florian ramillien wrote:
> ...
> > So I have tried to change the Vector in a Hastable with the 'object'
> as
> > key and 'entry' as value.
> > But 'object' is modified when it's loaded from DB, when user update
> one
> > of it's attributs, e
c below
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Baird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 01 October 2001 18:47
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance)
>
>
> Tim,
>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding, by clustering do you mean the
&g
I don't understand why having a generic cache interface would be bad. I
think Castor should provide some common cache implementations (FIFO, LIFO,
LRU, LFU,...), but give the application developer the freedom to develop
their own cache. This way if an application requires special caching
needs
nt: Monday, October 01, 2001 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The more I think of it, having a generic interface to the caching
technique does
> make sense. If there is some factory method that retrieves the c
ober 01, 2001 10:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance)
c below
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ned Wolpert
> Sent: 01 October 2001 17:34
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [castor-de
c below
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ned Wolpert
> Sent: 01 October 2001 17:34
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance)
>
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01-Oct-2001 Tim Fox wrote:
>> When the object is new or modified, call the db.load(). However,
>> I guess my first question is why doesn't this load from the cache like a
>> OQLQuery call would do? When the db.load() call is made, does the
>> re
, September 28, 2001 6:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
Just a thought:
If the potential of adding distributed caching is in the future of Castor or
at least needs to be supported along with cache eviction, maybe a basic
whitepaper describing the approach(es
all needs described in these threads are satisfied in a
way that doesn't compromise Castor's safe and effective APIs.
James
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Yip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 6:46 PM
Subject: Re:
Message-
>From: Adam Esterline [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 4:34 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
>
>RE: [castor-dev] PerformanceI have asked to improve the Cache
>implementation. I think that there are sever
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Yip
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
I am not convinced that Castor JDO is ready for distributed cache yet.
Having a distributed cache may not solve the problem you want to solve.
Well, we&#x
wall off.
>
>
> Examples of furniture are other passive cache types: weakReference
> cache, time-count limited cache or speedier implementation etc.
>
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Adam Esterline [mailto:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ok, this is quite interesting... Maybe there is something here...
Yes, if we are doing a delete, when the JMS message comes in, we simply call a
delete. That's easy enough.
When the object is new or modified, call the db.load(). However, I guess m
see below
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ned Wolpert
> Sent: 28 September 2001 16:54
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Performance
>
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SH
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
One of the places where I worked, we did this by using JMS to send messages
when an object was updated to other servers using TopLink. When they got the
message, they flushed the object out-of-the cache. It actually worked pretty
well, and I've got
Title: RE: [castor-dev] Performance
When using this approach, I would be interested what techniques you use to deal with reading cached objects in Castor that have had the underlying data changed by a batch update. Is there a clean way to "kick the cache" after running and extern
mber 27, 2001 10:42 AM
Subject: [castor-dev] Performance
>
>
> I have recently downloaded and started to use Castor for a project. We
had
> in place a set of code to simulate a piece of our system, and measure the
> inserts per second into the database. Using straight JDBC we usual
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 10:42 AM
Subject: [castor-dev] Performance
>
>
> I have recently downloaded and started to use Castor for a project. We
had
> in place a set of
I have recently downloaded and started to use Castor for a project. We had
in place a set of code to simulate a piece of our system, and measure the
inserts per second into the database. Using straight JDBC we usually
measure about 175 ins/s into the database. With Castor doing the
persistenc
55 matches
Mail list logo
