You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> on 2011/07/05 14:04:44 UTC
Wicket and Java 7
I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
how improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency
and collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
Has anyone run some tests?
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Bruno Borges <br...@gmail.com>.
I know, I was just mentioning what could be used of JDK 7 in advantage for
Wicket in a far far future. :-)
*Bruno Borges*
www.brunoborges.com.br
+55 21 76727099
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>
> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges <br...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
> > ResourceNameIterator.
> >
> > But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
> > watching API.
> >
> > *Bruno Borges*
> > www.brunoborges.com.br
> > +55 21 76727099
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del Bene <adelbene@ciseonweb.it
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
> how
> >> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
> >> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
> >>
> >> Has anyone run some tests?
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Grigorov
> jWeekend
> Training, Consulting, Development
> http://jWeekend.com
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by tetsuo <ro...@gmail.com>.
It's not a problem to keep supporting 'old' JDKs, if newer ones don't
give you any significant advantage.
When Java 8 comes out with closures, that would be a big reason to
break backwards compatibility (just like Java 5's generics). I don't
see any of this in Java 7.
Breaking compatibility just for the sake of it is not being 'bleeding
edge', it's just begging to lose users.
Tetsuo
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> :-)
> The diamond notation is just about the declaration at the right side
> of equals sign. This part is automatically typed for me by my IDE.
> So I'd say it saves me some reading, not writing :-)
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> the nice thing is that the diamond notation for generics is working
>> out of the box when you can target 1.7 your self in your app.
>> Thats can be quite a bit lot less typing of characters in wicket apps.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 14:57, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>>> module and pluggable.
>>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>>> JDK7).
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think that
>>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain in
>>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming library.
>>>>>
>>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>>
>>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>>> how
>>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Martin Grigorov
>>> jWeekend
>>> Training, Consulting, Development
>>> http://jWeekend.com
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Grigorov
> jWeekend
> Training, Consulting, Development
> http://jWeekend.com
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
:-)
The diamond notation is just about the declaration at the right side
of equals sign. This part is automatically typed for me by my IDE.
So I'd say it saves me some reading, not writing :-)
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> the nice thing is that the diamond notation for generics is working
> out of the box when you can target 1.7 your self in your app.
> Thats can be quite a bit lot less typing of characters in wicket apps.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 14:57, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming library.
>>>>
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Martin Grigorov
>> jWeekend
>> Training, Consulting, Development
>> http://jWeekend.com
>>
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
the nice thing is that the diamond notation for generics is working
out of the box when you can target 1.7 your self in your app.
Thats can be quite a bit lot less typing of characters in wicket apps.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 14:57, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
> module and pluggable.
> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
> JDK7).
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think that
>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain in
>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming library.
>>>
>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>
>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>
>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>> watching API.
>>>>
>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>> how
>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Grigorov
> jWeekend
> Training, Consulting, Development
> http://jWeekend.com
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
for a webapp the parallelism sits in the users all connecting at the
same time to the same server
not the divide up pure request of that server. I don't think you will
gain anything and only get loads of threading issues in the page..
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 17:52, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize what I
> wanted to say:
>
> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
> pattern?
>
> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism to
> render its children components.
>
>
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think
>>> that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain
>>> in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming
>>> library.
>>>>
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by richard emberson <ri...@gmail.com>.
Parallelizing code is great when your single machine is
never under very heavy load (all worker threads used).
Under very heavy load, the parallelization management code
simply adds additional overhead (my experience).
To shed, throttle, rollback, checkpoint&freeze or migrate
(transactional?) tasks as heavy load
conditions are approached on a machine is a system-level,
multi-machine, architectural issue that is not easily
inserted into an existing code base.
Richard
On 07/05/2011 08:52 AM, Andrea Del Bene wrote:
> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize
> what I wanted to say:
>
> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
> pattern?
>
> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism
> to render its children components.
>
>
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>
>> wrote:
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I
>>> think that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance
>>> gain in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming
>>> library.
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new
>>>>> File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by tetsuo <ro...@gmail.com>.
All this parallelism thing is overrated, and in web apps in
particular, it's pretty irrelevant. Web apps already use parallelism:
requests are handled in parallel. This is the kind of thing that
server vendors must worry about, so that we don't.
The more CPUs/cores you have, the more simultaneous users you'll be
able to handle. And, if you don't have that many users, you won't need
this kind of optimization either.
Some very specific applications need parallel processing, but they
will need parallelism in the backend (parallel search, raytracing,
scientific calculations/simulations....), not while generating HTML.
Besides, this kind of fork/join processing has its own overhead, both
in CPU cycles and in code complexity. Not worth it.
Tetsuo
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize what I
> wanted to say:
>
> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
> pattern?
>
> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism to
> render its children components.
>
>
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think
>>> that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain
>>> in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming
>>> library.
>>>>
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <an...@libero.it>.
Now I understand you :-)
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I understood you. But it seems you didn't understand me :-)
>
> Component rendering is currently not pluggable, i.e. you cannot set a
> different strategy and any of the IXyzSettings and use different code
> to do the rendering. Unless this is refactored to be pluggable there
> is no sense to think in this direction. JDK6 users will not be able to
> use Wicket if Wicket is build with JDK7.
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize what I
>> wanted to say:
>>
>> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
>> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
>> pattern?
>>
>> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
>> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
>> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism to
>> render its children components.
>>
>>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hi Andrea,
I understood you. But it seems you didn't understand me :-)
Component rendering is currently not pluggable, i.e. you cannot set a
different strategy and any of the IXyzSettings and use different code
to do the rendering. Unless this is refactored to be pluggable there
is no sense to think in this direction. JDK6 users will not be able to
use Wicket if Wicket is build with JDK7.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize what I
> wanted to say:
>
> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
> pattern?
>
> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism to
> render its children components.
>
>
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think
>>> that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain
>>> in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming
>>> library.
>>>>
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
hrm, dont think that is going to happen - at least not as far as page
rendering goes. i dont think anyone has cracked how to take code and
automatically figure out how to run it in parallel :)
-igor
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize what I
> wanted to say:
>
> -Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
> -Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
> pattern?
>
> Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
> think it could be splitted in subtasks?
> For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism to
> render its children components.
>
>
>> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
>> module and pluggable.
>> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
>> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
>> JDK7).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think
>>> that
>>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain
>>> in
>>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming
>>> library.
>>>>
>>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>>
>>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>>
>>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>>> watching API.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>.
My fault Martin, I have not explained well myself. I try to summarize
what I wanted to say:
-Java 7 introduces some tools to implement Fork/Join parallelism (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork-join_queue )
-Should we adopt this pattern? Is Wicket ready for implementing such a
pattern?
Render phase is probably the most time-expensive part of Wicket. Do you
think it could be splitted in subtasks?
For example it would be nice if a page could apply Fork/Join parallelism
to render its children components.
> I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
> module and pluggable.
> If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
> functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
> JDK7).
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think that
>> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
>> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain in
>> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming library.
>>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>>
>>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>>
>>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>>> watching API.
>>>>
>>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>>> how
>>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>
>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
I'm saying only that JDK7 based solutions should be in a separate
module and pluggable.
If my application runs on JDK7 then I can replace the default
functionalityX (based on JDK5/6) with the improved one (based on
JDK7).
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think that
> is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the stages of
> Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong performance gain in
> the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a parallel programming library.
>>
>> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
>> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
>> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
>> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
>> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
>> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>>
>> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
>> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>>
>>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>>> watching API.
>>>
>>> *Bruno Borges*
>>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>>> +55 21 76727099
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del
>>> Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think
>>>> how
>>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>.
Well, I wasn't expecting a rapid or easy adoption of JDK7, but I think
that is useful starting to explore how to parallelize some of the
stages of Wicket's rendering pipeline. This could lead to a strong
performance gain in the future, with adoption of JDK7 or using a
parallel programming library.
> You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
> users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
> So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
> can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
> For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
> will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
>
> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges<br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
>> ResourceNameIterator.
>>
>> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
>> watching API.
>>
>> *Bruno Borges*
>> www.brunoborges.com.br
>> +55 21 76727099
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>>
>>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think how
>>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>>
>>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
>
> For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
> Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
>
this is an understatement :)
wicket and java 7... my guess? more then 4 years...
But who knows if Oracle speeds it up (they say Java 8 next year..)
also the upgrades are a little bit faster by the users them selfs?
For example when will java 6 be out of support by Oracle? (what java 5
currently already is..)
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
You know that Wicket still uses JDK 1.5 (not even 1.6) because many
users still use JDK1.5 and cannot upgrade to the newer.
So any improvements based on JDK7 should be out of wicket-core. They
can be plugged but the default impl should be 1.5 based.
For example you can create ModificationWatcher based on NIO2 but it
will in wicket-jdk7 module (or similar) or in wicketstuff project.
For Wicket 1.6 we can move to JDK6 but this will be discussed later.
Usage of JDK7 for frameworks is not very close.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bruno Borges <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
> ResourceNameIterator.
>
> But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
> watching API.
>
> *Bruno Borges*
> www.brunoborges.com.br
> +55 21 76727099
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
>
>> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think how
>> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
>> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>>
>> Has anyone run some tests?
>>
>>
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket and Java 7
Posted by Bruno Borges <br...@gmail.com>.
Some internals of Wicket don't use collections. Take for instance
ResourceNameIterator.
But certainly there are some things that can be used, like the new File
watching API.
*Bruno Borges*
www.brunoborges.com.br
+55 21 76727099
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>wrote:
> I know it could sound a bit premature, but hasanyone starting to think how
> improve Wicket with the new JDK? I think that the new concurrency and
> collections API could help to speed up Wicket.
>
> Has anyone run some tests?
>
>