Mailing-List: contact users-help@myfaces.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "MyFaces Discussion" <users@myfaces.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of andrew.rw.robinson@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.82.228 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=QokBN2/N7tweE6N0HE1hTKzXhUVpN79bPYnvk0EzqCBY+dQtgS9g7ih5ka07ckRpfW/SbyItjyrnJsmqQr82FUX6Ai8EorZAIs70PRpKggWAHztaX+5hRU77yZS8vVbkYFeJcuGswiVFrhAJlhyyMJn/Wu7hq7dYPZ3SNsl28Ls=
Message-ID: <bc36a6210704091401h6e2127efj2887fbf2da1fab83@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 15:01:48 -0600
From: "Andrew Robinson" <andrew.rw.robinson@gmail.com>
To: "MyFaces Discussion" <users@myfaces.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Component Binding issues
In-Reply-To: <461AA8D2.20609@rhe.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <d6a6bc9f0704091241w3f40c005l616070002d3c52b8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <461AA8D2.20609@rhe.co.nz>

They can also cause issue with duplicate IDs if the ID of the bound
component is auto-generated

On 4/9/07, Simon Kitching <simon.kitching@rhe.co.nz> wrote:
> Phanidhar Adusumilli wrote:
> > Section 3.1.5 of the JSF specification, recommends not use component
> > bindings at session/application scope.
> >
> > What are the issues in binding components to manged beans at
> > session/application scope?
>
> A UIComponent object has references to its parent and all its children.
> Therefore if you store a reference to any UIComponent in a session-scope
>   bean then the entire component tree for a particular view is kept in
> memory.
>
> Session-scope backing beans are generally a bad idea anyway; they waste
> memory as they are created when a user accesses some view then hang
> around until the user logs out even if the user never revisits that
> view. If this object has a reference to a UIComponent, therefore keeping
> an entire component tree in memory too (see above) then that's even
> worse. There are some cases where session-scoped beans are appropriate
> but normal "backing beans for views" should be request-scoped wherever
> possible.
>
> Referencing a component from an application-scope bean (ie one shared
> between users) just makes no sense at all. Components are not
> thread-safe but application-scope beans are shared between users and
> therefore must be thread-safe.
>