cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: This caching/startup speedup project
Date Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:27:35 GMT
On Wednesday 12 March 2008, Benson Margulies wrote:
> The Christopher Chen email from February indeed is talking about
> building a service from WSDL on the client side. I'll take a look, but
> I have to say that this use-case has a Doctor-Doctor feeling to me,
> with the pill being wsdl2java?

That's really not the whole solution though.  Even if you run wsdl2java 
and have it generate code, by default, it still will grab the wsdl and 
use it.  That's kind of per-spec as things like the soap:address are not 
burned into the code.

Yes, you CAN get it to not use the wsdl, but by default, it still will.

Dan


> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Benson Margulies
> <bimargulies@gmail.com>
>
> wrote:
> > So, I'm reading Dan D's blog:
> >
> >
> > http://netzooid.com/blog/2007/07/03/tips-for-improving-springs-start
> >-up-performance/
> >
> > Did we do these things? We still load a pile of XML files, and we
> > may still be running schema validation, and I'm not sure where we
> > stand in bean-volume.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Benson Margulies
> > <bimargulies@gmail.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Permit me to be really confused. Do people really expect speedy
> > > performance when digesting a WSDL at runtime, as opposed to having
> > > generated annotated code and then compiling it?
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> 
wrote:
> > > > Most likely, you should grab one of the simple demos, start the
> > > > server,
> > > > and profile the client.  Put the main method in a for loop to
> > > > make the entire thing run 10 times or something so you can see
> > > > where things are a
> > > > bit more expensive.
> > > >
> > > > There are two things to consider:
> > > > 1) The pure java first case: in this case, the RSFB just deals
> > > > with the
> > > > reflection stuff
> > > >
> > > > 2) The wsdl first cases: in this case the RSFB has to work with
> > > > both the
> > > > WSDL and the reflection stuff to get things matched up.  This
> > > > may be quite a bit more expensive.  I don't really know.
> > > >
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday 06 March 2008, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > > > > I took a first look with an eval copy of JProfiler while
> > > > > waiting for response from them.
> > > > >
> > > > > All our startup is in the noise for a typical unit test. Do I
> > > > > need a really big service to see the problem that got us into
> > > > > this discussion:?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Benson Margulies
> > > > > <bimargulies@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > It's CPU that I'm proposing to hunt.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Bharath Ganesh
> > > > > > <bharathganesh@gmail.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > I had done some memory profiling on CXF 2.0.2, quite some
> > > > > > > time back.  I think it was pretty stable except for some
> > > > > > > issues in PolicyEngine and HandlerChainInvoker which are
> > > > > > > fixed on the
> > > >
> > > > trunk.
> > > >
> > > > > > > As of now I can see only
> > > > > > > this [1].
> > > > > > > Please do let me know if you are suspecting a leak at some
> > > >
> > > > place.
> > > >
> > > > > > > I shall
> > > > > > > look into it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > Bharath
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1]:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.nabble.com/Memory-leak-at-WSDLManagerImpl-td15131599.
> > > >ht
> > > >
> > > > > > >ml
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Benson Margulies
> > > > > > > <bimargulies@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > I might be willing to take a run at this. Can someone
> > > > > > > > tighten
> > > >
> > > > up
> > > >
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > idea
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > bit? If we were to cache service models, what would
we
> > > > > > > > key/invalidate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > cache against? How do we know that we subsequently
need
> > > >
> > > > 'exactly
> > > >
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > same
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > one'.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For that matter, what about some profiling to make
sure
> > > > > > > > that there
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > isn't
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > something we could tighten up?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anyone have a favorite tool for that purpose?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > J. Daniel Kulp
> > > > Principal Engineer, IONA
> > > > dkulp@apache.org
> > > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog



-- 
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer, IONA
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

Mime
View raw message