On 3/4/06, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 3/4/06, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The only solution is to forbid
> >> scriptlets (or as an option use a processing when a page does not
> >> contain scriptlets - and of course, rewrite a significant amount of
> >> Jasper - way cool :D), in which case compilation is not needed, and we
> >> can simply execute the nodes (memory is saved by optionally discarding
> >> the nodes between requests).
> >
> >Why ? It could as well save all static content in a separate file ( I
> >remember this was implemented at least in part ), and instead of
> >generating the strings in the class, use
> >a cache that manages the string table.
> >
>
> The Jasper with 3.3 has this as an option. Since it's main use was to
> shrink the size of the _jspservice method, and Jasper2 has a better
approach
> to this, it was dropped in Jasper2. Also, in 3.3 Jasper, the static text
> object is a static object in the class, so you don't get any memory
benifits
> from using it.
>
> I'm also with Remy on this that almost all users would rather trade memory
> for speed on this issue. However, if you want to make it an optional
> behavior for Jasper to store the static text as either a serialized char
> [][] as in TC 3.3, or ResourceBundle, by all means, knock yourself out
;-).
3.3 implementation was far from perfect, but I think it was in a good
direction.
It seems this patch won't pass - but maybe other patches could make at least
small improvements in reducing the required memory use, and let users do the
trade they want.
I agree with you and Remy that memory is cheap and it's good to trade memory
for
speed - if you can fit all your database, plus all the pages and servlets in
memory - you have a perfect situation. But there are a lot of cases where
you can't put everything in memory, and you have to choose what to keep in
memory - maybe a large buffer for database, and some common pages - but keep
infrequently used stuff out, or unload
things that are not in use. It's not always as simple as 'just keep
everything in ram'.
>
> >That would be more flexible than this patch - and allow more control
> >over how much memory is used. Well - with all the APR and sendfile you
> >could even try to send large chunks of static content from disk - not
> >sure what's the performance benefits in the static servlet for
> >example.
> >
>
> In most non-example JSPs, there really aren't many big blocks of static
text
> to sendfile. They tend to look more like:
> <c:forEach items="${itemList.items}" var="foo">
> <tr><td>${foo.name}</td><td>${foo.price}</td><td>${foo.available
}</td></tr>
> </c:forEach>
>
Unfortunately jasper ( and JSPs ) are a bit too complex - maybe a simpler
template system
could be used to play with such memory management experiments.
Well - since JSP has no chance of fitting in my memory requirements ( 32M
RAM on my NSLU2 ) -
I'll probably have to try something...
Costin
