r JSF is with
> complex component-tree rendering/handling. Why not create a very
> complex form with multiple nested components, etc. and compare jsf to
> tapestry? That's more "true to life" and illustrates performance in
> more realistic situations.
>
> Robert
>
Hi,
I ran a simple Tapestry vs JSF benchmark, results are posted on my blog:
http://www.resupedia.com/blojsom/blog/Java/2006/02/28/Tapestry-vs-JSF.html
Alex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
We saw about 10 fold improvement after denormalizing Oracle database.
Alex
On Thursday 09 February 2006 16:53, Patrick Casey wrote:
> Just how many tables are you joining in these tables here? When I
> see phrases like "highly normalized data model", my "danger will robinson"
> alarm goes o
ttp://cayenne.sf.net/
>
> It offers a higher level of abstraction than hibernate, and seems to start
> faster for me than hibernate. YMMV.
> Geoff
>
> On 28/01/06, Alexander Varakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry if this is offtopic but I don't k
Hi,
Sorry if this is offtopic but I don't know where to ask.
I am using Hibernate for my current project but it has annoying long startup
of about 10-15 sec on 1.5GHz PC.
I also tried iBATIS but it is also not very fast to come up.
Also it would be nice to have an option of dynamic generation o
Before settling on Tapestry, I tried comparing Tapestry and Wicket and I
didn't like in Wicket that for each form control one has to create an
instance of a class and bind it to html page. IMO this violates the DRY(do
not repeat yourself) principle. This could be OK if Wicket was backed by some
> According to a poll (http://java.about.com/b/a/225580.htm), more people
> will use Tapestry than any other Java web frameworks.
This is an interesting poll: the first result was that Wicket is the one, now
it is Tapestry
theserverside.com was built using Tapestry, they have an article how they
I'm hoping the future Spindle4 will allow
> something like a hot-code-replace feature.
>
> Alexander Varakin wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I noticed that in v4.0 first page display takes much longer than in v
> > 3.0.3: 15 sec vs 7 sec.
> >I used the helloworld app
ponses. Did you see them?
>
> Gregg
>
> On 1/13/06, Alexander Varakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that in v4.0 first page display takes much longer than in v
> > 3.0.3:
> > 15 sec vs 7 sec.
> > I used the helloworld applic
Hi,
I noticed that in v4.0 first page display takes much longer than in v 3.0.3:
15 sec vs 7 sec.
I used the helloworld application for testing.
My environment is:
JBoss 4.0.2 (also tried Jetty and Tomcat, same result)
Sun JDK 1.5.06
Intel Celeron 1.7GHz Laptop
512 MB RAM
Debi
JBOSS-IDE has nice editor with syntax highlighting for HTML and XML. It also
has many other features like building war and ear files and deploying them.
On Saturday 14 January 2006 07:21 am, Jan Vissers wrote:
> http://amateras.sourceforge.jp/cgi-bin/fswiki_en/wiki.cgi?page=EclipseHTMLE
>ditor
valid problem.
>
> Gregg
>
> On 1/13/06, Alexander Varakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that in v4.0 displaying first page takes much longer than in v
> > 3.0.3: 15 sec vs 7 sec.
> > I used the helloworld application for testin
Hi,
I noticed that in v4.0 displaying first page takes much longer than in v
3.0.3: 15 sec vs 7 sec.
I used the helloworld application for testing.
My environment is:
JBoss 4.0.2 (also tried Jetty and Tomcat, same result)
Sun JDK 1.5.06
Intel Celeron 1.7GHz Laptop
512 MB RAM
D
13 matches
Mail list logo