Yep, that’s where I’m headed next. Obviously there’s some hesitation to
do that on the part of our product owners so it takes a while to get to
that point.
Will let you know what I find.
Thanks!
-Matt
On 7/18/14, 8:44 AM, "Ryan Baxter" wrote:
>Matt, I think further investigation is warranted.
Matt, I think further investigation is warranted. I really think you
need to find a way to trace through the code and find where the
slowdown is occurring. That will help us narrow down what the problem
is. I know it is production, but getting some code on there that
starts timing method calls a
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for responding!
I’ve attached our ehcacheConfig, however, comparing it to the default
configuration the only difference is the overall amount of elements (1
in ours vs 1000 in default) and also the temp disk store location.
I’m assuming you are asking if each user in our syst
Matt can you tell us more about how you have configured the caches in shindig?
When you are rendering these gadgets are you rendering the same gadget across
all users?
-Ryan
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 3:31 PM, "Merrill, Matt" wrote:
>
> Stanton,
>
> Thanks for responding!
>
> This is one instan
Stanton,
Thanks for responding!
This is one instance of shindig.
If you mean the configuration within the container and for the shindig
java app, then yes, the locked domains are the same. In fact, the
configuration with the exception of shindig¹s host URL¹s is exactly the
same from what I can
Hi Matt,
Is the configuration for locked domains and security tokens consistent
between your test and production environments?
Do you have any way of tracing the request in the log entry you provided
through the network? Is this a single Shindig server or is there any load
balancing occurring?
