lol that is amazing. this is my face after looking at the logo -> :O
im just trying to get inside the mind of the designer... 1. we have a logo for tapestry that is spherical, _almost_ face like you could say 2. we have a project called tapestry prop * something happened here* 3. ill put a hat with a propeller on top of the logo its basically what happens between steps 2 and 3 that i am most interested in. anyone know what happened there? On 3/28/06, James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Notice the hat has a little propeller or "prop"? > > > this may be _slightly_ off topic, but can i just ask what exactly does > > putting a hat on the tapestry logo represent? a swirly hat? the penknife > > with the logo, fair enough... represents tools etc.. but a hat on the > > logo? > > WHY IS THERE A HAT ON IT?!?! im finding it hard to work while i dont > know > > the answer to this... > > > > > > > > On 3/26/06, Adam Zimowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Just tried Tapestry-Prop and works painlessly with my Tap4 app. Whatta > >> way to go. And since I already took aggresive approach to keep OGNL > >> simple, this certainly will eliminate a good half of my OGNL calls. > >> > >> Adam > >> > >> On 3/26/06, Adam Zimowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > How nice. Learning something new everyday. This looks like an obvious > >> > must-have for any serious Tapestry app. > >> > > >> > Thanks Ryan! > >> > > >> > On 3/26/06, Ryan Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > Don't forget about the Tapestry-Prop library at > >> > > http://howardlewisship.com/tapestry-javaforge/tapestry-prop/ > >> > > Combined with the "dot-pruning" technique this will let you > >> eliminate > >> a > >> > > lot of OGNL. > >> > > > >> > > -Ryan > >> > > > >> > > Vincent wrote: > >> > > > Hi , > >> > > > > >> > > > That may explain a lot why the performance of the my application > >> slow > >> > > > down a lot recently. > >> > > > But anyway , is there any plan to improve the performance of OGNL > >> , > >> > > > since Tapestry 4.0 already released? > >> > > > > >> > > > On 3/26/06, Adam Zimowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> Hi Andreas, > >> > > >> > >> > > >> FYI, OGNL is one of the biggest bottlencecks in Tapestry. I'm > >> learning > >> > > >> about it from performance testing my own app, but I could not > say > >> it > >> > > >> better than what Patrick explained a while back on this list. > His > >> post > >> > > >> was regarding Tap 3.0.3, but from my Tap4 tests, the OGNL > >> performance > >> > > >> is still very much a case for performance tweaks. In short, try > >> to > >> > > >> limit your OGNL usage to what's absolutely necessary, and do the > >> rest > >> > > >> in plain Java. My app is growing large very quickly, but I'm > able > >> to > >> > > >> keep OGNL down to simple one-dot expressions. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Perhaps you've seen Patrick's post (it's really well explained), > >> but > >> > > >> I'm including it here: > >> > > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> > >> > > >> From: Patrick Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mailed-By: > >> jakarta.apache.org > >> > > >> Reply-To: Tapestry users <tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org> > >> > > >> To: Tapestry users <tapestry-user@jakarta.apache.org> > >> > > >> Date: Feb 15, 2006 11:38 AM > >> > > >> Subject: RE: Optimization Questions > >> > > >> > >> > > >> The last time I did a serious performance attach on a Tapestry > >> 3.0.3 > >> > > >> app, by far the biggest performance bottleneck was the demon > >> OGNL. > >> Howard > >> > > >> and I went round and round on that one, but the upshot is that > >> Howard's > >> > > >> using OGNL right, and OGNL is actually a decent reflection > >> package > >> (and > >> > > >> hence faster than, say, Apache PropUtils), but it's still not > >> native code. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Given that some page renders can require literally > >> thousands > >> of OGNL > >> > > >> calls (I was up at like 1800 distinct evaluations for one page), > >> its often > >> > > >> the bottleneck. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> I've pasted my OGNL performance hints below. None of it's > >> rocket > >> > > >> science, but aggressively following these techniques knocked > >> about > >> 50% off > >> > > >> the page render time on my forms, so there's some serious > >> performance to be > >> > > >> gained. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> --- Pat > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Rules to Make OGNL Run Faster: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> **Dot Pruning: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Reduce the number of "dots" in your calls. For example, lets say > >> you had a > >> > > >> call that read: "ognl:foo.bar.dog". That's a three-hopper as far > >> as > >> OGNL is > >> > > >> concerned, requiring three times the work of a one hopper like > >> "ognl:dog". > >> > > >> You can make the thing run 3X as fast if your go into your page > >> class and > >> > > >> create a getter and setter for "dog" e.g. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Public String getDog() { > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Foo foo = getFoo(); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If (foo == null) > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Return null; > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Bar bar = getBar(); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If (bar == null) > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Return null; > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Return bar.getDog(); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> } > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Public void setDog(String value) { > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Foo foo = getFoo(); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If (foo == null) > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Return; > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Bar bar = getBar(); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If (bar == null) > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Return; > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Bar.setDog(value); > >> > > >> > >> > > >> } > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> What we've done is created two java stub classes that > >> do > >> 2/3 of > >> > > >> the work for OGNL so it only has to make one "hop" to get at the > >> methods it > >> > > >> needs. Net result is it'll run 3X as fast. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> **Be Static: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> OGNL isn't smart enough to realize that a reference > to > >> a > >> public > >> > > >> static final object is, in fact, static. It resolves the whole > >> thing via > >> > > >> inspection each time. So if you want to make an expression that > >> reads, for > >> > > >> example: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> <span jwcid="@Insert" value="ognl:@[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > >> /> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> It's faster to do: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> <span jwcid="@Insert" value="Monday" /> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> You're kind of Sol if you change "Monday" to "Mon" > >> mind > >> you, so > >> > > >> I wouldn't switch over to literals like this until rollout time, > >> but it does > >> > > >> make a difference. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> **Avoid Putting Components Inside Foreach: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> There's a lot of OGNL grinding going on behind the scenes to > >> support a > >> > > >> foreach, and even more ognl grinding going on to call a > >> component. > >> So if you > >> > > >> put the one inside the other, well, CPU cycles burn. So in many > >> cases: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> <span jwcid="@Foreach" source="ognl:listOfDogs" > >> values="ognl:currentDog"> > >> > > >> <span jwcid="@DogDisplay" dog="ognl:currentDog"/> > >> > > >> <span> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Is *dramatically* slower than moving the foreach down into the > >> DogDisplay > >> > > >> component e.g. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> <span jwcid="@ListOfDogsDisplay" listOfDogs="ognl:listOfDogs" /> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> And then combing the foreach and the dogdisplay logic inside of > >> one > >> > > >> component. Otherwise every time the sub component gets called > >> there's at > >> > > >> least one ognl set/get pair being executed to push data into the > >> component > >> > > >> and pluck it out again. Basically pretend you're working in a > >> system which > >> > > >> has *really* inefficient method call overhead and view > components > >> as > >> > > >> methods. Then optimize to reduce method calls. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> **Notes: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> If you do your own profiling, one warning I do want to give is > >> that > >> on > >> > > >> JProfiler at least, it can "hide" the true culprit in the bowels > >> of > >> the call > >> > > >> stack. So if you have an ognl expression that reads > >> > > >> "ognl:foo.bar.thisMethodTakesForever", it'll show up as a lot of > >> CPU time > >> > > >> belonging to ognlGet until you dive into the call stack and get > >> to > >> > > >> whatever's at the pointy end of the get. Most of the time the > >> actual get is > >> > > >> trivial so all the time really is going into OGNL, but sometimes > >> if > >> you have > >> > > >> expensive gets (or sets) it can make OGNL look worse than it is. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > > > > > James Carman, President > Carman Consulting, Inc. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
