Re: [jboss-dev] Further profling: Where should I focus?

Ales Justin wrote: >> IMO, we should just remove AOP entirely as our customers probably are >> not going to use it. > > This is exactly what will happen - remove AOP - if we disable it by > default and re-write lifecycle handling to plain OO, w/o any costly > pointcut matching. > > The only cost is lookup for potential @AOPEnable on the bean. > While we still keep optional cool feature of creating an AOP proxy for a > bean. > >> For @JMX just write another deployer and do it >> regularly. Similarly with lifecycle and other features. > > Regularly? > If you mean to register an mbean, that is actually not what we/users want. > See my response to Dimitris this morning. > There probably is a way to make AOP irrelevant to boot performance, but you need to consider pluses and minuses nevertheless...Everybody (thousands) of users are effected by boot performance, while only a handful care about @JMX, etc. > While this could be a deployer feature, I think it's far more complex to > do it than tie it into the bean's lifecycle. > e.g. scan for @JMX, remembering the handle, checking if it's overridden > for an instance, ... while we already have all this implemented in > bean's lifecycle handling, it's just not optimized yet. > > What do you mean by "similarly with lifecycle and other features"? > @JMX, @JNDI, @Password, ... is the lifecycle callback. > All these annotations that trigger AOP. Are they under the jboss namespace? Controlled by us? You might want to consider meta-annotations and turning @AOPEnabled into one. i.e. @AOPEnabled public @interface JMX {...} You look at the bean's class annotations, then look at those annotations for @AOPEnabled. >> Again, if you want to take this route, I'd be happy to do the work. >> I am willing to spend the next month on boot performance and AS. > > Excellent. > So will I and the rest of MC team. Well, I need to know what I could do to help. Is Kabir fine on the AOP stuff? VFS3 seems to be ok? What about removing JMX Kernel Backward Compatibility and upgrading services to MC? I can tackle any of these problems with little guidance I just don't want to be duplicating any work (like with the deployer sorting).