No Leo, cannot be a problem!

As Gerhard already explained we only keep a configurable number of 'windows' 
per Session. Once this limit is exceeded the LRU one will get destroyed. It's 
really a non-issue. The problem Andreas faces must be another one. Or it's a 
bug, but this is really well tested imo.

LieGrue,
strub




----- Original Message -----
> From: Leonardo Uribe <lu4...@gmail.com>
> To: MyFaces Discussion <users@myfaces.apache.org>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 5:47 AM
> Subject: Re: CODI: Exclude windowId from certain pages
> 
> Hi
> 
> Are you invalidating the session (logout) in some point? Maybe that could be
> related to the problem, because if you keep the session active and create
> hundreds of different windows, since the session is not released that memory
> will not be restored and the stress testing will not be accurate (or 
> realistic).
> 
> regards,
> 
> Leonardo Uribe
> 
> 2012/11/29 Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petra...@gmail.com>:
>>  hi andreas,
>> 
>>  please have a look at WindowContextConfig - see e.g.
>>  #isUnknownWindowIdsAllowed and #getMaxWindowContextCount
>>  -> it shouldn't be an issue (since you can customize the default 
> behaviour).
>> 
>>  btw:
>>  we are doing a lot of such tests (without windowId=automatedEntryPoint) and
>>  never saw an issue - but we don't use glassfish ;)
>> 
>>  regards,
>>  gerhard
>> 
>>  http://www.irian.at
>> 
>>  Your JSF/JavaEE powerhouse -
>>  JavaEE Consulting, Development and
>>  Courses in English and German
>> 
>>  Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  2012/11/29 Andreas Kaiser <kaiser.andr...@gmail.com>
>> 
>>>  Hi
>>>  thanks for the answer
>>> 
>>>  I will have a look at this.
>>>  BTW. it seems that the the windowId is a potential security issue.
>>> 
>>>  For instance call a side with an unknown windowId. CODI will generate a 
> new
>>>  valid one. Just change the generated one to a new invalid id. CODI will
>>>  generate a new one again. Repeat this until you are out of ids or the
>>>  server is out of memory ;-)
>>> 
>>>  This is whats happend in my application due to stress testing
>>> 
>>>  Regards
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Gerhard Petracek <
>>>  gerhard.petra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>  > hi andreas,
>>>  >
>>>  > first of all: welcome @ myfaces!
>>>  >
>>>  > there are different approaches - e.g. you can use urls with
>>>  >   windowId=automatedEntryPoint
>>>  > (see the javadoc in WindowContextManager)
>>>  >
>>>  > regards,
>>>  > gerhard
>>>  >
>>>  > http://www.irian.at
>>>  >
>>>  > Your JSF/JavaEE powerhouse -
>>>  > JavaEE Consulting, Development and
>>>  > Courses in English and German
>>>  >
>>>  > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > 2012/11/29 Andreas Kaiser <kaiser.andr...@gmail.com>
>>>  >
>>>  > > Hi everybody
>>>  > >
>>>  > > I have following setup :
>>>  > >
>>>  > > Glassfish 3.1.2.2
>>>  > > Weld
>>>  > > Java EE6 + JSF + CDI + JPA
>>>  > > CODI: 1.0.5
>>>  > >
>>>  > > My problem:
>>>  > >
>>>  > > We use and like the windowId Feature from CODI. But it causes 
> some big
>>>  > > problems on some pages which are specially created for stress 
> testing.
>>>  > >
>>>  > > These pages are accessed from 500+ clients generated from 
> JMeter.
>>>  > > Every client acts as a own browser.
>>>  > >
>>>  > > This pages (RequestScoped) can be accessed without login. 
> Therefore
>>>  CODI
>>>  > > generates a new windowId for every client.
>>>  > >
>>>  > > The problem is that the JMeter tests run multiple times. Due 
> to this
>>>  the
>>>  > > Hashmap in JSFWindowContext.java consums a lot of memory 
> until the
>>>  > > Glassfish has no space left which leads into a 100 % CPU 
> usage because
>>>  > the
>>>  > > garbage collector tries to free a even the last few bytes.
>>>  > >
>>>  > > My question is
>>>  > > 1. Is it possible to create windowIds only a user is logged 
> in
>>>  > > 2. Is there an option to change the default behavior
>>>  > > 3. Can i exclude some pages being handled by the codi 
> JSFWindowManager
>>>  > >
>>>  > >
>>>  > >
>>>  > >
>>>  > > Regards
>>>  > >
>>>  >
>>> 
>

Reply via email to