Richard, this isn't saying there is something wrong with your design,
because IMO, there isn't... Its purely an implementation problem of the VDF.
Bill Burke wrote:
Ok, i did a profile of nothing in deploy/ and removed the weld and
jbossweb deployers:
30% of total boottime was spent in addDeployer() which makes sense since
WebServices adds like what? 30 deployers? That 30% of time is solely
in sorting the deployers.
Richard Opalka wrote:
> OK Bill.
> Let us know your investigation results, please.
> I'm staying tuned ...
>
> Richard
>
> On 12/17/2009 02:19 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>> Richard, I'm not convinced it is JBWS. I'll do an actually profile
>> today. Unless I'm missing something, I'm looking at your deployers and
>> not seeing much happening in start().
>>
>> Richard Opalka wrote:
>>
>>> I created
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBWS-2873
>>>
>>> Will dig deeper.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>> On 12/17/2009 02:01 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok, I did some performance analisys without a profiler or knowledge of
>>>> the codebase.
>>>>
>>>> default/ profile: 33s
>>>>
>>>> Next I removed everything in deploy. I also had to remove
>>>> jbossweb.deployer, weld.deployer to get things to run:
>>>>
>>>> 2nd profile: 18.65 seconds
>>>>
>>>> Now, an interesting thing. I removed jbossws.deployer.
>>>>
>>>> No jbossws.deployer: 12.22 seconds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, wow! jbossws.deployer is taking 6 seconds to deploy!
>>>>
>>>> But why? I took a wild guess and maybe it was classloading, jar
>>>> indexing, or scanning because jbossws.deployer is around 3megs and
>>>> dwarfs other .deployers in deployers/ directory. So, I combined the
>>>> seam jar with jacorb. No significant startup time. This leads me to
>>>> believe this isn't a VFS problem.
>>>>
>>>> So, maybe its jbossws? Well, I look at the beans created, and they
>>>> really aren't doing anything significant. BUT there is a SHIT LOAD
of
>>>> beans being deployed.
>>>>
>>>> This leads me to believe this is something fundamental with MC.
>>>>
>>>> BUT...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You probably already know this.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>