Just downloaded JProfiler eval. Compared tagfile performance between 7.0.21 and 7.0.trunk (this one this time : http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/)
With your optimization, we achieve a 24% performance gain - nice ;) Test 7.0.21 7.0.trunk tagfile 267ms 206ms You can see JConsole output * 7.0.21 : http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/233/tagperftagfile7021.jpg/ * 7.0.trunk : http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/52/tagperftagfile70trunk.jpg/ Tests were made with http://localhost:8080/tagfilesperf/generated/edit-tagfile.jsp One more question though : Do you think we can cache ValueExpression instances ? Caching those instance, we could gain 14% more performance on this use case. If we can cache them, what would be a good cache key ? (<expressionAsString><jspPageName> ?) Also, need to update classictag performance suite, there's a problem in it. I'l then do one more comparison test between classictag and tagfile. Note : this is once more my home computer, but using JProfiler is a bit more accurate I think. -- Details -- 7.0.21 - tagfile Total time : [267 ms] in edit-tagfile.jsp Note : if not specified, units in microseconds [860] 1 iteration - [565]doTag (cf input_tagx.java code) - [450] PageContextImpl.proprietaryEvaluate - [249] ValueExpressionImpl.getValue - [122] ElExpressionFactoryImpl.createValueExpression [note 1] - [236]DefaultInstanceManager.newInstance - [203] DefaultInstanceManager.processAnnotations [note 2] note 1 : 14% gain Perhaps we can optimize here caching ValueExpressions instance (caching where since tagfiles are not pooled ?). What would be the key of such a cache ? <expression+jsp.class ?> note 2 : 23.6% gain : Mark optimization. Cache annotation processing. 7.0.trunk - tagfile Total time : [206 ms] edit-tagfile.jsp [687] 1 iteration - [586]doTag (cf input_tagx.java code) - [470] PageContextImpl.proprietaryEvaluate - [269] ValueExpressionImpl.getValue - [127] ElExpressionFactoryImpl.createValueExpression [note 1] - [44] DefaultInstanceManager.newInstance - [10] DefaultInstanceManager.processAnnotations [note 2] Thanks !!! ----- Mail original ----- De : Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> À : Tomcat Users List <users@tomcat.apache.org> Cc : Envoyé le : Mercredi 7 Septembre 2011 22h20 Objet : Re: Re : Re : Performance issue in simpleTags and tagfiles On 07/09/2011 20:36, Adrian Gonzalez wrote: > Sorry, no real difference. > > Even worse, I'm on my home computer and here I don't see anymore the *5 > difference between simple tags and classic tags. The figures I saw were: Test OP Me Cached tagfile 500 328 203 classic 100 141 156 simple 500 250 156 none 94 140 156 A slight increase in the case where the cache isn't used and a reasonable improvement in the other cases. Performance tuning is always going to be system dependent. In this case I think there us enough evidence to justify putting in the cache - even if this is effectively a micro benchmark. > I'll continue these tests tomorrow at work (perhaps there's some file > scanning / reading in action - and since I'm with AV software...). I'd be very interested to see those results. > - Tests results - > > Downloaded tomcat trunk sources from > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/trunk/ That is actually 8.0.x but there is currently very little difference between that an 7.0.x with is at: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/tc7.0.x/trunk/ Cheers, Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
