I always keep nabble open when I'm at work :)
These parameters can be transferred to web.xml, so that recompile is not
needed when changing these parameters:
public static void contributeApplicationDefaults(MappedConfiguration<String,
String> configuration, ApplicationGlobals globals) {
configuration.add("tapestry.page-pool.hard-limit",
globals.getServletContext().getInitParameter("page_hard_limit"));
}
and in web.xml
<web-app>
<display-name>Some Tapestry 5 Application</display-name>
<context-param>
<!-- The only significant configuration for Tapestry 5, this informs
Tapestry of where to look for pages, components and mixins. -->
<param-name>tapestry.app-package</param-name>
<param-value>fi.hanken.resbuilder.tapestry5</param-value>
</context-param>
<context-param>
<param-name>page_hard_limit</param-name>
<param-value>60</param-value>
</context-param>
This can be used through out every single service and page and component. To
access this in a page or component use:
@Property @Inject @Value("${page_hard_limit}")
private String pageHardLimit;
Injection can be used in service constructor also (I think) or by using
buildSomeService method instead of the usual binder.bind
Of course T5 makes it easy to read these from a file or database or from
what not, but I have noticed that many admins accept editing web.xml and
restarting the app ok.
Hopefully this helps. (And makes it easier to say to admins that just
configure the app according to the load they are experiencing.)
-99
nille hammer wrote:
>
> Man that was a quick answer! Thanks for that. I am aware of this options
> in the configuration. I had not tuned them before, because load is not
> my problem. Anyway I have tuned them now and am currently waiting for
> the admistrator to deploy the newest war.
>
> According to acces-logs I was the only user accessing the page. So as
> far as I understand the mechanism only one instance of index should have
> been created and not 20. I think it is an issue with configuration in
> production environment. But I have no idea where to take a closer look
> (i.e. where to build in log-messages, which of Tomcat's configuration
> options to check etc.).
>
> So suggestions are still more than welcome.
>
> Nillehammer
>
> 9902468 schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Eventually we had to add these to appmodule:
>>
>> configuration.add("tapestry.page-pool.hard-limit", "60");
>> configuration.add("tapestry.page-pool.soft-limit", "20");
>> configuration.add("tapestry.page-pool.soft-wait", "20 ms");
>>
>> as instructed here:
>> http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/guide/conf.html
>>
>> This solved our problems, and you can go up as long as your server has
>> memory. Our problems were only in production, as development stress just
>> isn't enough. (This is why one really should do load testing with jmeter
>> or
>> similar tool.)
>>
>> The defaults could be a bit more? Or considerably less, so that the
>> developer would hit these walls during development and understands to
>> load
>> test / tune the parameters.
>>
>> - 99
>>
>>
>> nille hammer wrote:
>>> Hi list,
>>>
>>> I am also facing the problem that 9902468 had. I have -according to
>>> Howard's suggestion- replaced every pageLink with a customPageLink to
>>> prevent targeted pages from being created unecessarily. The problem
>>> persists. Trying to load the index-Page of my application with a browser
>>> I have to wait about two minutes before I get an empty page. In the
>>> app's log the following Exception appears:
>>>
>>> java.lang.RuntimeException: The page pool for page 'Index' (in locale
>>> de) has been exausted: there are 20 instances currently being used and
>>> no more can be created. Try increasing the hard limit (symbol
>>> tapestry.page-pool.hard-limit) to allow additional instances to be
>>> created, or increasing the soft wait (symbol
>>> tapestry.page-pool.soft-wait) to trade away some throughput for more
>>> efficient use of page instances.
>>> at
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.internal.services.PagePoolCache.checkout(PagePoolCache.java:199)
>>> at
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.internal.services.PagePoolImpl.checkout(PagePoolImpl.java:107)
>>> at $PagePool_11c76f8cf9a.checkout($PagePool_11c76f8cf9a.java)
>>> at
>>> org.apache.tapestry5.internal.services.RequestPageCacheImpl.get(RequestPageCacheImpl.java:43)
>>> at
>>> $RequestPageCache_11c76f8cf99.get($RequestPageCache_11c76f8cf99.java)
>>> at
>>> $RequestPageCache_11c76f8cf91.get($RequestPageCache_11c76f8cf91.java)
>>> ...
>>>
>>> In development and in production environment I use Java 6 and Tomcat 6.
>>> Tapestry is 5.0.14. The strange thing is that I am only seeing this in
>>> production environment.
>>>
>>> Has anyone a suggestion how to track this down? I am pretty stuck with
>>> this.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance, nillehammer
>>>
>>> Howard Lewis Ship wrote
>>>> Tapestry is obtaining page instances to see if there is an activation
>>>> context for the page.
>>>>
>>>> I expect to optimize this in the future, to check to see if the page
>>>> has an event handler for the passivate event.
>>>>
>>>> In the meantime, you could build your own PageLink component that
>>>> generates the link by invoking
>>>> ComponentResources.createPageLink("pagename", true) ... that will tell
>>>> Tapestry to generate a link to the page with no activation context,
>>>> and the page will NOT be queried for its context, and therefore, won't
>>>> need to be attached to the current request.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 3:58 AM, 9902468 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> we are experiencing strange hard pool limit reached exceptions. (For
>>>>> the
>>>>> user count that we have.) After debugging a little, it seems that our
>>>>> left
>>>>> menu component, which is full of page links, instantiates not only the
>>>>> page
>>>>> that we are at, but also the ones that are referenced in page link.
>>>>>
>>>>> This can be seen also in that exception page is shown, if one of the
>>>>> pages
>>>>> that are referenced in page links have an error.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this correct behavior? And should we really use common a href= tags
>>>>> to
>>>>> avoid this? Further more, is it possible to create infinite loop, when
>>>>> page
>>>>> a has page link to page b, which has page link to page a?
>>>>>
>>>>> - 99
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Page-pool-hard-limit-and-page-instance-usage-tp19217773p19217773.html
>>>>> Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Page-pool-hard-limit-and-page-instance-usage-tp19217773p19569731.html
Sent from the Tapestry - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
