Hello Jeremy,
try also to disable any versioning and use read only models. I have tuned my
private wicket project this way and it now supports more than 20.000 concurrent
sessions on a single tomcat server. If everything in your model is serializable
you can also use tomcats disk or jdbc persistence store for sessions. There is
also a terracotta project, so you can cluster your wicket (1.3) application
lineary. My average memory usage with 20.000 sessions in memory and very
complex page structures (multiple including page object levels) is about 300MB.
I think this could serve even a large community site :-)
Maciej
----- Original Message -----
From: Igor Vaynberg
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Wicket-user] Sessionless Wicket?
detachable models are a must.
in my experience a wicket page is only about 50kb on average. that would
hardly cause an OOME on a server. 1.3 has second level session store that pages
to disk, so that is something else you might want to try.
once you convert to detachable models oomes should go away.
there is an example in wicket-examples on stateless stuff if you need to go
that far.
-igor
On 5/2/07, Jeremy Thomerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know that I read somewhere that there is, or is going to be, a way to run
your wicket application without creating a session (until absolutely
necessary). We have a site that has mostly been converted to Wicket now, and
almost all of it is state-less data.... The URLs are all bookmarkable (98% of
them are), so there is not much state to track. We don't need a full object
graph of all your pages and components, except for on very few pages once you
have signed in.
We're experiencing out of memory problems increasingly with an increase in
traffic. I'm not holding much in the session, but objects are held in pages
and components.... I now believe we should have used detachable models for many
things rather than directly holding a reference to a DB-backed object. Should
I start by going back and retrofitting many of those private references within
components to use detachable models so that the objects are not held in memory?
Any other suggestions?
Thank you!
Jeremy Thomerson
texashuntfish.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Wicket-user mailing list
Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
