September 2009 - jboss-dev-forums

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by alex.loubyansky＠jboss.com

Yes, performance comparison depends on specific test, since binding logic (at least the current one) depends on the number of properties, etc. So, if there are lots of classes with lots properties the outcome for the comparison may be quite different. Also having fast start-up time as the goal (e.g. my container starts in 2 sec), parsing has to be fast and optimized for the first run. There is no time to warm up. Besides that, another thing that worries me and which has been missing attention is marshalling. With the rapid development of all the advanced unmarshalling features marshalling has been totally lost. And if we are revisiting our binding needs I think it makes sense to keep marshalling in mind. Otherwise, we might be trapped. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4258001#4258001 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4258001

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss Microcontainer Development POJO Server] - Re: Seam deployments and hot deployments in AS 5.1.0

by jeff.haynes＠q9.com

I was experiencing the same problem as described in this thread, but I think there's a pretty simple workaround that I'm now using (until the 5.2 comes out with the new deployers code). I'm also deploying my exploded war file using Eclipse and was seeing the *.jsfdia and *.spdia files being deployed to my WEB-INF directory along with everything else. The simple workaround? Just put an exclude directive in your build.xml to make sure the *.jsfdia and *.spdia files are not being deployed with your exploded application. I'm using an Eclipse project that I set up using seamgen, but for anyone else using something different, I'm sure you can use a similar approach. Here's the appropriate portion of my build.xml file: | <target name="war" depends="compile" | description="Build the WAR structure in a staging directory"> | | . . . | | <copy todir="${war.dir}/WEB-INF"> | <fileset dir="${basedir}/resources/WEB-INF"> | <include name="*.*"/> | <exclude name="*.*dia"/> | <include name="classes/**/*.*"/> | <exclude name="classes/**/*.class"/> | </fileset> | </copy> | | . . . | | </target> | My environment: jdk1.6.0_16 Eclipse 3.4.2 JBoss AS 5.1.0.GA Seam 2.2.0.GA RichFaces 3.3.1.GA View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257985#4257985 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257985

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by adrian＠jboss.org

"bill.burke(a)jboss.com" wrote : Hey, classloading was the only thing I could think of. You said earlier that after the first 100 iterations fast-jaxb was faster, right? Yes, once its warmed up, it looks like ~30% faster for Alex's simple test. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257965#4257965 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257965

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Hey, classloading was the only thing I could think of. You said earlier that after the first 100 iterations fast-jaxb was faster, right? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257961#4257961 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257961

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by adrian＠jboss.org

"bill.burke(a)jboss.com" wrote : Adrian, I'd have to disagree as the number of JbossXB classes will probably be very similar to the number of JAXB annotated classes that AS will use. Which actually argues against it being the classloading making a difference in this test. ;-) | $ jar -tf jboss-xml-binding.jar | wc -l | 351 | So your argument is reversed once there are more than ~350 classes in all the object models that need to be parsed, e.g. | $ jar -tf jboss-metadata.jar | wc -l | 812 | View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257960#4257960 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257960

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

"jason.greene(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Right, the binding is really what I was thinking would be the actual area to improve on. You are definitely correct that with only 30% of the time being binding we may be disappointed. However, I suspect that the parsing time portion of the pie is off because of schema validation. That is known to be slow. We should try disabling that and see what we get. I should use more precise terminology. I mean binding generation. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257959#4257959 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257959

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : "jason.greene(a)jboss.com" wrote : and it can do direct method invocation as opposed to reflection which is definitely faster. | | I think you'll find that that is probably not as relevant as you think. | This is a similar problem to Serialization. | | The time it takes to | | 1) decide what to do - typically a string comparison on an element or attribute name | 2) coerce xml data into non-string types | | will likely "swamp" the small amount of extra time it takes to invoke a setter via reflection, | most of which is the construction of an Object array to pass to Method.invoke(). | | That's not to say the difference is unimportant. | If you have to parse lots of xml, it will definitely add up over time. | Yes you have a point, it may not be that faster for one parse. However, reflection does involve all kinds of initial caching on the first invocation, so maybe it will have some small but measurable impact. It should definitely not be slower though which is really what i was driving at. anonymous wrote : | e.g. See my 0.4 seconds from 2.4 seconds estimate above (which is probably not | all reflection overhead anyway?) Right, the binding is really what I was thinking would be the actual area to improve on. You are definitely correct that with only 30% of the time being binding we may be disappointed. However, I suspect that the parsing time portion of the pie is off because of schema validation. That is known to be slow. We should try disabling that and see what we get. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257956#4257956 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257956

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Adrian, I'd have to disagree as the number of JbossXB classes will probably be very similar to the number of JAXB annotated classes that AS will use. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257952#4257952 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257952

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by adrian＠jboss.org

"bill.burke(a)jboss.com" wrote : Maybe it is classloading that is the culprit? Fast-jaxb has no binding time, but the first time you parse requires loading classes. Each JAXB annotated class = 1 Parser class in the model I created. Since JAXB already has had its classes loaded at bind time, this overhead isn't accounted for in the test. I doubt that would make a difference for this test since I think there are only 2 classes? It shouldn't take 0.8 seconds to do that. ;-) But it also wouldn't be a fair test if you excluded the extra classloading time from the numbers. We want to know which is faster in the real world. The overhead of the extra classes are an argument against the code generation in that case. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257951#4257951 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257951

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[JBoss XML Binding Development] - Re: XB profiling during the AS start-up

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

Maybe it is classloading that is the culprit? Fast-jaxb has no binding time, but the first time you parse requires loading classes. Each JAXB annotated class = 1 Parser class in the model I created. Since JAXB already has had its classes loaded at bind time, this overhead isn't accounted for in the test. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257946#4257946 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257946

15 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums September 2009