Matej, how can I say to my model to serialize some objects and to not others? If I would detach the entire mode, that would mean that the next ajax request would require again to call the (very costly) service and this is not acceptable.
Alex. Matej Knopp-2 wrote: > > There seems to be something terribly weird going on. Your application > looks like a corner case. On page like that, I wouldn't be surprised > if there was penalty using SecondLevelCacheSessionStore, but the > numbers you've posted are way too bad to be caused by wicket itself. > > My guess is that your model objects are extremely heavy. Maybe with > references to your processing layer as well. Of course this will not > work with 2nd level cache session store, as the whole thing is > serialized. Normally you detach your models so the data kept in > memory/session/disk is significantly reduced. > > I think secondlevelcachesessionstore should be usable for you as well, > but that would require not serializing everyhing, rather then that > just keep things in memory and "inject" the dependencies on > deserialization. > > -Matej > > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Indeed, it is a very big component hierarchy (It contains at least 3 >> levels >> of nested AjaxTabbedPanel components). >> The application is, in fact, a single page and it uses a lot of ajax to >> perform the updates. The model reflect the component hierarchy >> (Appliction >> has a single modelObject which nests another objects corresponding to >> each >> component). I do not have a lot of detaching logic, because it is >> important >> to have all the data in the model (caching), also because the services >> are >> very costly operations. >> >> If this description is not enough for replication, I will be glad to help >> by >> giving you another details. >> >> Alex. >> >> >> Martijn Dashorst wrote: >> > >> > How big is the page? Sounds like a really, really big component >> > hierarchy. Then it sounds reasonable that the httpsession store is >> > much faster: it keeps it in ram, and doesn't use serialization until >> > the session is serialized (server shutting down, deciding to put >> > session to disk or replication of session across cluster) iirc. >> > >> > I think we would appreciate some way of replicating your results. I >> > assume you can't share the actual code, but could you share a spin-off >> > of the page's component structure and a Model that replicates the data >> > stuff's size (including the detach logic)? >> > >> > Martijn >> > >> > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> If the pages wouldn't be serializable, it wouldn't work in development >> >> mode. >> >> Is it right? >> >> >> >> I think that it is not necessarily about how large is application, in >> my >> >> case it is about how large is the model I'm working with for that >> >> specific >> >> request (ajax request). >> >> >> >> My action was: fetch a subview of a very large table 300x300, each >> cell >> >> has >> >> a heavy model object. >> >> >> >> Alex. >> >> >> >> >> >> Johan Compagner wrote: >> >> > >> >> > that looks very strange to me. We have also a very large app here >> and >> >> we >> >> > dont notice a difference >> >> > So i am very curious what is happening at your place then. Are you >> sure >> >> > for >> >> > example that the pages >> >> > are serializable ? That we don't have constantly exceptions? >> >> > >> >> > johan >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Maybe the profiling was not a perfect one. But still, I have to >> give >> >> up >> >> >> using >> >> >> SecondSessionLevelStore just because the responsiveness of the >> >> >> application >> >> >> is very slow. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Johan Compagner wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > invocation count 1?? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > So you only do 1 request and you profile that? >> >> >> > thats not a good test. You have to do plenty and multiply on the >> >> same >> >> >> > time >> >> >> > (10 for 100 request or something like that) >> >> >> > to really see the difference. (and have a warm up phase) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > johan >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On 9/10/07, Alex Objelean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Matej, I must disagree with you regarding performance issues of >> the >> >> >> >> SecondLevelSessionStore. I've reverted the >> >> Application#newSessionStore >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> HttpSessionStore and this significantly improved the application >> >> >> overall >> >> >> >> performance. Maybe this is not so obvious for small >> applications, >> >> but >> >> >> >> when >> >> >> >> it is about a large one - things changes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Below, you will find attached two images. The first one is a >> >> profiling >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> an >> >> >> >> action when working with HttpSessionStore, the second one is a >> >> >> profiling >> >> >> >> for >> >> >> >> the same action when using SecondSessionLevelStore. The >> difference >> >> is >> >> >> >> huge: >> >> >> >> 593ms vs 174420ms. I cannot explain what exactly is going on, >> but >> >> I've >> >> >> >> noticed that by switching from default SecondLevelSessionStore >> to >> >> the >> >> >> >> HttpSessionStore improved a lot the responsiveness of the >> >> application. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Alex. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/HttpSessionStore.jpg >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/file/p12588790/SecondSessionLevelStore.jpg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Matej Knopp-2 wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > You can revert to httpsessionstore by changing >> >> >> >> > Application.newSessionStore method. But that's not >> recommended. >> >> What >> >> >> >> > are your performance problems? I doubt it is caused by the >> >> session >> >> >> >> > store. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > -Matej >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > On 9/7/07, jamieballing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We are trying to do some performance troubleshooting and want >> to >> >> >> >> disable >> >> >> >> >> the >> >> >> >> >> second level page cache. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Is there any way to do this? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> >> Jamie >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >> View this message in context: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12563895 >> >> >> >> >> Sent from the Wicket - 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] >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> View this message in context: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12588790 >> >> >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> View this message in context: >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589190 >> >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> View this message in context: >> >> >> http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12589567 >> >> Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst >> > Apache Wicket 1.3.0-beta3 is released >> > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.0-beta3/ >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590414 >> Sent from the Wicket - 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] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Disable-the-SecondLevelPageCache--tf4403977.html#a12590661 Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
