You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by zambak <za...@gmail.com> on 2009/12/16 16:02:28 UTC

ResourceResolver mapping performance

Hi

I was wondering if one of the core devs would be able to comment on
performance impact of Resource Resolver mapping feature? How much overhead
is involved in resolving a node using a path defined in the map vs. "direct"
access?

Regards
zambak
-- 
View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/ResourceResolver-mapping-performance-tp92228p92228.html
Sent from the Sling - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: ResourceResolver mapping performance

Posted by zambak <za...@gmail.com>.

Thanks Felix - that helps!

zambak

Felix Meschberger-2 wrote:
> 
> Hi zambak
> 
> In fact the map is always checked for each access, so a path matching a
> map entry may even resolve faster than a patch without a match.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Regards
> Felix
> 
> zambak schrieb:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I was wondering if one of the core devs would be able to comment on
>> performance impact of Resource Resolver mapping feature? How much
>> overhead
>> is involved in resolving a node using a path defined in the map vs.
>> "direct"
>> access?
>> 
>> Regards
>> zambak
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/ResourceResolver-mapping-performance-tp92228p92278.html
Sent from the Sling - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: ResourceResolver mapping performance

Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.

Hi zambak

In fact the map is always checked for each access, so a path matching a
map entry may even resolve faster than a patch without a match.

Hope this helps.

Regards
Felix

zambak schrieb:
> Hi
> 
> I was wondering if one of the core devs would be able to comment on
> performance impact of Resource Resolver mapping feature? How much overhead
> is involved in resolving a node using a path defined in the map vs. "direct"
> access?
> 
> Regards
> zambak