struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hortig├╝ela Saguar, Juan Antonio" <jhor...@mapfre.com>
Subject Struts 1.1 and DynaActionFormProblem
Date Thu, 05 Jan 2006 08:01:35 GMT
Hi,

 

I'm using struts 1.1 and i have found a problem using DynaActionForms and
the memory consumption it causes. Looking for a solution, I have seen a
similar case in the users lists, but it happened in 2003 and it doesn't seem
solved. I am talking about the following text:

 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ted Husted [mailto:husted@apache.org]
>>Sent: den 29 juli 2003 13:41
>>To: Struts Developers List
>>Cc: Maya.Retzlaff@mediacatalyst.com
>>Subject: Re: FW: Memory consumption 1.1 b3 vs. 1.1 final
>> 
>> 
>>Except for some of the Sun libraries, there is absolutely no closed 
>>source in the Struts distribution. So, everything should be 
>>traceable if 
>>you have all the Common source packages on board. In this 
>>case, you may 
>>need the Commons BeanUtils source.
>> 
>>The <action scope="session" ... /> property is meant to refer to the 
>>ActionForm for that mapping and should not affect any object 
>>represented 
>>in the struts-config. To have the ActionForms default to 
>>request scope, 
>>you can specify another classname in the action-mappings element. The 
>>RequestActionMapping class is provided for that purpose.
>> 
>>AFAIK, the only objects Struts would ever store in the session are a 
>>session-scoped ActionForm, a Locale object, and a session-scoped 
>>exception error. The other objects specified by the 
>>struts-config should 
>>be stored in application scope and shared by all clients.
>> 
>>I believe what you are looking at is a pointer from the 
>>DynaActionForm 
>>to the shared configuration in application scope. If we are somehow 
>>copying the Struts Configuration into the session scope, then, yes, I 
>>believe that would be a bug ... or at least a feature that 
>>needs to be 
>>reconsidered =:0)
>> 
>>-Ted.
>> 
>>Maya Retzlaff wrote:
>> 
>>>Dear Developers, 
>>> 
>>>I've been lurking on the developers list for a while and 
>> 
>>submitted the
>> 
>>>questions/problems below to the struts-user list. 
>> 
>>Unfortunately I haven't
>> 
>>>gotten a reply, and I was recommended to try the developers 
>> 
>>list. I hope,
>> 
>>>that posting this list to the developer list, is not to big 
>> 
>>a breech of
>> 
>>>protocol. 
>>> 
>>>Best regards
>>> 
>>>/Maya Retzlaff
>>> 
>>>ps. Due to time differences I might be a bit slow in replying ds.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Maya Retzlaff [mailto:Maya.Retzlaff@mediacatalyst.com]
>>>>Sent: den 28 juli 2003 21:19
>>>>To: 'Struts Users Mailing List'
>>>>Subject: RE: Memory consumption 1.1 b3 vs. 1.1 final
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>Hi, 
>>>> 
>>>>Unfortunate no one replied. But I'll try again with more 
>> 
>>information.
>> 
>>>>After a bit more debugging, when using the debugger see 
>> 
>>screen shot. 
>> 
>>>>http://maya.retzlaff.se/debugScreenShot.png, sorry couldn't 
>>>>export to text.
>>>>Its a bit censored.
>>>> 
>>>>This means that the whole struts-config.xml (a HashMap with 
>>>>127 elements) is
>>>>saved in the session for every user when <action 
>>>>scope="session"> is set in
>>>>struts-config.xml. For us with the memory restrictions we 
>>>>face, the 50k that
>>>>the strutsconfig takes in memory is very severe. 
>>>>If this is a conscious design description, it would be very 
>>>>good to hear the
>>>>reasons. 
>>>>If not could we in anyway work with someone to help debug it 
>>>>so we could
>>>>submit a patch?
>>>> 
>>>>Now when comparing the source files for the different 
>>>>releases we can't find
>>>>anything significantly different in any of these classes. And 
>>>>finding where
>>>>moduleconfig gets set into the FormBeanConfig is untraceable. 
>>>>Is it done in
>>>>apache.commons? 
>>>> 
>>>>A search in bugzilla either hasn't yielded anything either, 
>>>>regrettably
>>>> 
>>>>We are on a schedule and need to have this solved on Weds, 
>>>>otherwise we need
>>>>to go back to the 1.1 b3 release. Obviously we would prefer 
>> 
>>to use the
>> 
>>>>stable 1.1 release.
>>>> 
>>>>Help would be very much appreciated. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>/Maya

 

I would like to know if someone had the same problem and how it cna be
solved; with the following versions, with a patch, etc...

 

Thank you in advance

 

 

Juan Antonio

 

 

 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message