Hi James, I will try it.

Gianluca Sartori
--
https://dueuno.com


On Mon, 22 Sept 2025 at 15:03, James Daugherty via dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Gianluca,
>
> When you say debug mode, you are doing all of your performance testing with
> debug mode? I would highly encourage you to test with runWar or runJar
> without debug mode.  Debug mode has historically always been significantly
> slower.
>
> -James
>
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 4:30 AM Gianluca Sartori <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply, we've done the tests on the same code, the
> > "only" difference is Grails 6 VS Grails 7. Tests are not in
> > production, but locally from the IDE in debug mode. Yet grails 6 VS
> > Grails 7 tests share the same environment.
> >
> > We have a hierarchy of objects to build any view, those objects go
> > from a simple container to a Table that has a Body, a set of Rows,
> > each row has many Cells each cell can have a Label or many other
> > components.
> >
> > This hierarchy is rendered with GSP fragments (templates) so yes we
> > may have a lot going on under a rendered Table. I know that most of
> > the time is taken by the "layout engine" (?) because we've optimized
> > the Table rendering just by limiting the number of components, thus
> > embedding them instead of including them as separate templates.
> >
> > On the slowness, it is consistently slow but the warmup I've done was
> > a couple of browser refreshes by hand just to compile the GSPs, I
> > didn't go through a loop of 10.000 requests.
> >
> > About dynamically compiling GSP in production, we haven't specified
> > anything in the standard 'application.yml' config, but my senses feel
> > that even in production the first rendering takes longer I've always
> > thought it was because of GSP compilation and it is not a problem to
> > us.
> >
> >
> > Gianluca Sartori
> > --
> > https://dueuno.com
> >
> > On Sun, 21 Sept 2025 at 17:18, David Estes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > A bit surprising . Is it consistently slower or just the first few
> > times? Once it warms up it should still be ok for production no? Or are
> > you  dynamically compiling gsp in prod?
> > >
> > > I agree it should be further optimized , but dismissing it for initial
> > performance seems aggressive. Unless it’s consistently significant on
> > slowness .
> > >
> > > That being said those render times in general seem very high for most
> > GSP I even render . Is there a large amount of taglib usage, layouts,
> etc?
> > Narrowing down what might be causing overall slow page renders may be
> worth
> > a gander. With those times I doubt it’s strictly GSP.
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sep 21, 2025, at 9:26 AM, Gianluca Sartori <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I guess we need to find a solution refactoring GSP, rendering of
> > pages must
> > > > be as fast as possible.
> > > >
> > > > I will try to find time to give it a look but this means Grails 7 is
> > out of
> > > > scope for us at the moment.
> > > >
> > > > Unless we can run it with Groovy 3, i don’t like this, but if it
> > solves the
> > > > issue it would make it for us, do you think that would be possible?
> > > >
> > > > Should we switch to another templare solution? Which one would you
> > suggest?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Gianluca Sartori
> > > > --
> > > > https://dueuno.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > > From: Daniel Sun <[email protected]>
> > > > Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2025 at 01:46
> > > > Subject: Re: GSP generation, Groovy 4 slower than Groovy 3?
> > > > To: <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Gianluca,
> > > >
> > > >   Groovy 4 enables indy by default. It's slower to run for the first
> > time
> > > > because the initialization for invokedynamic is quite expensive. (
> See
> > > > also: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8278540 )
> > > >
> > > >   It ususally gains best performance when the methods are invoked for
> > > > 10000+ times.
> > > >
> > > >   BTW, Jochen proposed some optimization for current design of indy,
> > the
> > > > performance for the first runs will be much better when the
> > optimization is
> > > > done.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Daniel Sun
> > > >
> > > >> On 2025/09/16 12:18:41 Gianluca Sartori wrote:
> > > >> Hi folks,
> > > >>
> > > >> we have started porting Dueuno to Grails 7/Groovy 4. We have a
> > > >> stress-test that generates a big table (200 columns x 100 rows) with
> > > >> GSP (we are doing server-side rendering).
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm reporting the tests below. Is there something we can do to get
> > > >> back the performances we had with Grails 6/Groovy 3?
> > > >>
> > > >> Even with INDY turned off we are almost 1sec slower on the tests,
> more
> > > >> than 2x slower on normal pages:
> > > >>
> > > >> Grails 7/Groovy 4
> > > >> Page 1 - TRANSITION rendered in 185ms
> > > >> Page 2 - TRANSITION rendered in 453ms
> > > >>
> > > >> Grails 6/Groovy 3
> > > >> Page 1 - TRANSITION rendered in 83ms
> > > >> Page 2 - TRANSITION rendered in 280ms
> > > >>
> > > >> TESTS
> > > >> ======
> > > >> Same URL (Table stress-test), 4 requests after 3 warmup requests
> (not
> > > >> shown, cold-running the app from intelliJ), measuring the Grails
> > > >> render() execution time.
> > > >>
> > > >> From slower to faster:
> > > >>
> > > >> Grails 7 - Indy ON
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 4807ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 4779ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 4660ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 4699ms
> > > >>
> > > >> Grails 7 - Indy OFF
> > > >> tasks.withType(GroovyCompile) {
> > > >>    groovyOptions.optimizationOptions.indy = false
> > > >> }
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 3660ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 3442ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 3510ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 3700ms
> > > >>
> > > >> Grails 6
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 2853ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 2864ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 2734ms
> > > >> TRANSITION rendered in 2800ms
> > > >>
> > > >> Gianluca Sartori
> > > >> --
> > > >> https://dueuno.com
> > > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to