Thanks! Obviously I should read more than code :)
btw, case insensitive map can be obtained by calling org.apache.tapestry5.ioc.internal.util.CollectionFactory.newCaseInsensitiveMap(); - 99 Ulrich Stärk wrote: > > You don't have to write your own ServletContextSymbolProvider, it already > comes shipped with > Tapestry. See here > http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/apidocs/index.html?org/apache/tapestry5/ioc/services/SymbolProvider.html > You just have to configure it. > > Uli > > 9902468 schrieb: >> Yep, just read through your discussion: >> >> http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=19547763&framed=y&skin=302 >> >> and that would be the intelligent way of doing it :) >> >> I'll code symbol provider when I have time. Hopefully these providers can >> be >> included in T5 distribution, as these are highly reusable and add only >> little to none "weight" to the distribution. >> >> - 99 >> >> >> Ulrich Stärk wrote: >>> Why not instantiate a ServletContextSymbolProvider (the ServletContext >>> is >>> available from the >>> ApplicationGlobals service) and contribute it to the SymbolProvider >>> before >>> ApplicationDefaults and >>> FactoryDefaults. That way you can directly override >>> tapestry.page-pool.hard-limit and automatically >>> have all other init parameters as symbols, too. >>> >>> Uli >>> >>> 9902468 schrieb: >>>> 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] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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-tp19217773p19570234.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]
