I'm puzzled by the retained size for 20 sessions. Is that due to how
he wrote the app and marked everything as @Persist, or is T5 really
that bad? I know I try to minimize the use of @Persist, but the post-
redirect model makes this much more difficult, seriously impairing one
key aspect of what makes T5 scalable. I've done a lot with T4 and
pretty much never persisted anything in the session except the login
state and any servlet overhead.
Norman Franke
Answering Service for Directors, Inc.
www.myasd.com
On Sep 16, 2009, at 4:07 PM, Howard wrote:
Peter Thomas has created a detailed performance analysis of Wicket,
Tapestry, Grails and Seam. It's an interesting read from non-Tapestry
user's perspective, and complements Ben Gidley's findings.
He's measuring raw performance and Wicket narrowly bests Tapestry in
most categories, with Seam pretty close and Grails much further out.
I'm disturbed by some of his problems developing the application (with
respect to adding client-side credit card number validation) and
there's no mention of Tapestry's other qualities, such as live class
reloading, exception reporting, etc. Still, criticism of Tapestry's
documentation hits close to home (and it, alas, too fair). Accurate
and
very complete, but not organized for a beginner ... something I'm
hoping to address over the next few months.
--
Posted By Howard to Tapestry Central at 9/16/2009 12:59:00 PM
