You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tapestry.apache.org by rajesh sukumaran <ra...@yahoo.co.in> on 2009/03/11 16:35:54 UTC
Implication of client side redirect
Hi,
I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
regards,
Rajesh
Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com>.
How does the redirect-after-post mechanism affect a servlet based or portlet based Tapestry system?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Howard Lewis Ship <hl...@gmail.com>.
Part of the driving force here is to have servlet Tapestry and portlet
Tapestry (when it arrives) work the same.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> While I highly agree the redirect-after-post pattern is a good practice. It only makes sense in some situations. It makes sense to use it when you're submitting a form and the form submission was successful (ie. Tapestry "success" event fires). But if validation fails, Tapestry should not be using a redirect to re-show the form with the validation errors.
>
> When validation fails, it should use the response for the same request for re-showing the form, it should not be sending a 302. I wish there is a way to disable redirects for validation failures only.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>
> To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:34:56 PM
> Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
>
> Hi Rajesh,
>
> Tapestry follows the "redirect after post" principle. This has a lot of "pros" (avoiding double submission of forms, for instance), but if you're really concerned about it, there's a configuration option to turn it off.
>
> In org.apache.tapestry5.SymbolConstants:
>
> /**
> * If set to true, then action requests will render a page markup response immediately, rather than sending a
> * redirect to render the response.
> */
> public static final String SUPPRESS_REDIRECT_FROM_ACTION_REQUESTS = "tapestry.suppress-redirect-from-action-requests";
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Robert
>
> 11, 2009, at 3/1110:35 AM , rajesh sukumaran wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>>
>> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>>
>> regards,
>> Rajesh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
Howard M. Lewis Ship
Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by "Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo" <th...@gmail.com>.
Em Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:31:30 -0300, Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com>
escreveu:
> Redirect-after-post does not really solve that problem because if you
> hit Back button twice, you still get the same problem.
I disagree. You just have this problem when you submitted a form and
returned a page in the same request. With redirect-after-post, POSTs never
return pages, and that's exactly what the Firefox (and other browsers,
besides Opera, AFAIK) warns.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Independent Java consultant, developer, and instructor
http://www.arsmachina.com.br/thiago
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Peter Stavrinides <P....@albourne.com>.
There is a lot wrong with the current model of the web and the HTTP standard in general requires a major overhall so far as web applications are concerned, but considering this current state we are in, redirect-after-post is a good solution, perhaps not perfect but this is not an ideal world either.
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Greggory" <da...@yahoo.com>
To: "Tapestry users" <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, 12 March, 2009 02:23:47 GMT +02:00 Athens, Beirut, Bucharest, Istanbul
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Yeah, you're right about that.
Still I don't like the redirect-after-post for validation failures because it needs the form data to be persisted somehow between the two requests. We can solve it partially by using client-side persistence for simple data, but for complex object hierarchies, there is no way other than to persist to session. Session persistence is not something I'm very crazy about because it tends to introduce a number of problems.
For example, if a user opens Item A for editing in one browser tab, then without touching A, opens item B in another browser tab, item B just overwrote item A in session persisted property. So if he goes back to item A and edits and saves it, he will be saving item A content into item B. You can write a lot of hacky/boilerplate code to get around it, but it's not very elegant.
Also, if we choose to disable redirect-after-post functionality all together, it makes it very hard to do a number of things in tapestry, I believe Howard warns about doing so here.
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/guide/conf.html
----- Original Message ----
From: nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:44:00 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Hi Dave,
your message made me doubt and I immediately tried that out (on IE 6 and
FF 2). I was not able to reproduce, what you were implying. So I still
think that redirect after post solves the problem.
Regards nillehammer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com>.
Yeah, you're right about that.
Still I don't like the redirect-after-post for validation failures because it needs the form data to be persisted somehow between the two requests. We can solve it partially by using client-side persistence for simple data, but for complex object hierarchies, there is no way other than to persist to session. Session persistence is not something I'm very crazy about because it tends to introduce a number of problems.
For example, if a user opens Item A for editing in one browser tab, then without touching A, opens item B in another browser tab, item B just overwrote item A in session persisted property. So if he goes back to item A and edits and saves it, he will be saving item A content into item B. You can write a lot of hacky/boilerplate code to get around it, but it's not very elegant.
Also, if we choose to disable redirect-after-post functionality all together, it makes it very hard to do a number of things in tapestry, I believe Howard warns about doing so here.
http://tapestry.apache.org/tapestry5/guide/conf.html
----- Original Message ----
From: nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:44:00 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Hi Dave,
your message made me doubt and I immediately tried that out (on IE 6 and
FF 2). I was not able to reproduce, what you were implying. So I still
think that redirect after post solves the problem.
Regards nillehammer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>.
Hi Dave,
your message made me doubt and I immediately tried that out (on IE 6 and
FF 2). I was not able to reproduce, what you were implying. So I still
think that redirect after post solves the problem.
Regards nillehammer
Dave Greggory schrieb:
> Redirect-after-post does not really solve that problem because if you hit Back button twice, you still get the same problem.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>
> To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:15:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> I am afraid I disagree with you on this point. Even when validation
> fails, redirect after post does make sense. Although you're right that
> double submission is not a problem when validation fails. If you respond
> directly to a post, the post will get into the browser's history. This
> is a problem when the browser's back button is used. This would result
> in the ugly dialogue "Do you want to send formdata again..." popping up.
> This can only be avoided by never directly responding to a post-request.
>
> Regards, nillehammer
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
http://www.winfonet.eu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com>.
Redirect-after-post does not really solve that problem because if you hit Back button twice, you still get the same problem.
----- Original Message ----
From: nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:15:38 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Hi Dave,
I am afraid I disagree with you on this point. Even when validation
fails, redirect after post does make sense. Although you're right that
double submission is not a problem when validation fails. If you respond
directly to a post, the post will get into the browser's history. This
is a problem when the browser's back button is used. This would result
in the ugly dialogue "Do you want to send formdata again..." popping up.
This can only be avoided by never directly responding to a post-request.
Regards, nillehammer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by nillehammer <ta...@winfonet.eu>.
Hi Dave,
I am afraid I disagree with you on this point. Even when validation
fails, redirect after post does make sense. Although you're right that
double submission is not a problem when validation fails. If you respond
directly to a post, the post will get into the browser's history. This
is a problem when the browser's back button is used. This would result
in the ugly dialogue "Do you want to send formdata again..." popping up.
This can only be avoided by never directly responding to a post-request.
Regards, nillehammer
Dave Greggory schrieb:
> While I highly agree the redirect-after-post pattern is a good practice. It only makes sense in some situations. It makes sense to use it when you're submitting a form and the form submission was successful (ie. Tapestry "success" event fires). But if validation fails, Tapestry should not be using a redirect to re-show the form with the validation errors.
>
> When validation fails, it should use the response for the same request for re-showing the form, it should not be sending a 302. I wish there is a way to disable redirects for validation failures only.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>
> To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:34:56 PM
> Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
>
> Hi Rajesh,
>
> Tapestry follows the "redirect after post" principle. This has a lot of "pros" (avoiding double submission of forms, for instance), but if you're really concerned about it, there's a configuration option to turn it off.
>
> In org.apache.tapestry5.SymbolConstants:
>
> /**
> * If set to true, then action requests will render a page markup response immediately, rather than sending a
> * redirect to render the response.
> */
> public static final String SUPPRESS_REDIRECT_FROM_ACTION_REQUESTS = "tapestry.suppress-redirect-from-action-requests";
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Robert
>
> 11, 2009, at 3/1110:35 AM , rajesh sukumaran wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>>
>> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>>
>> regards,
>> Rajesh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
--
http://www.winfonet.eu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Dave Greggory <da...@yahoo.com>.
While I highly agree the redirect-after-post pattern is a good practice. It only makes sense in some situations. It makes sense to use it when you're submitting a form and the form submission was successful (ie. Tapestry "success" event fires). But if validation fails, Tapestry should not be using a redirect to re-show the form with the validation errors.
When validation fails, it should use the response for the same request for re-showing the form, it should not be sending a 302. I wish there is a way to disable redirects for validation failures only.
----- Original Message ----
From: Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:34:56 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Hi Rajesh,
Tapestry follows the "redirect after post" principle. This has a lot of "pros" (avoiding double submission of forms, for instance), but if you're really concerned about it, there's a configuration option to turn it off.
In org.apache.tapestry5.SymbolConstants:
/**
* If set to true, then action requests will render a page markup response immediately, rather than sending a
* redirect to render the response.
*/
public static final String SUPPRESS_REDIRECT_FROM_ACTION_REQUESTS = "tapestry.suppress-redirect-from-action-requests";
Cheers,
Robert
11, 2009, at 3/1110:35 AM , rajesh sukumaran wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>
> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>
> regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by rajesh sukumaran <ra...@yahoo.co.in>.
Thanks Robert. It is defenitly good to know that there is way to turn it off, it keeps my options open.
----- Original Message ----
From: Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 11 March, 2009 10:04:56 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
Hi Rajesh,
Tapestry follows the "redirect after post" principle. This has a lot of "pros" (avoiding double submission of forms, for instance), but if you're really concerned about it, there's a configuration option to turn it off.
In org.apache.tapestry5.SymbolConstants:
/**
* If set to true, then action requests will render a page markup response immediately, rather than sending a
* redirect to render the response.
*/
public static final String SUPPRESS_REDIRECT_FROM_ACTION_REQUESTS = "tapestry.suppress-redirect-from-action-requests";
Cheers,
Robert
11, 2009, at 3/1110:35 AM , rajesh sukumaran wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>
> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>
> regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Check out the all-new Messenger 9.0! Go to http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>.
Hi Rajesh,
Tapestry follows the "redirect after post" principle. This has a lot
of "pros" (avoiding double submission of forms, for instance), but if
you're really concerned about it, there's a configuration option to
turn it off.
In org.apache.tapestry5.SymbolConstants:
/**
* If set to true, then action requests will render a page markup
response immediately, rather than sending a
* redirect to render the response.
*/
public static final String SUPPRESS_REDIRECT_FROM_ACTION_REQUESTS
= "tapestry.suppress-redirect-from-action-requests";
Cheers,
Robert
11, 2009, at 3/1110:35 AM , rajesh sukumaran wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new
> projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle
> response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of
> Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will
> result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event
> request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade
> the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>
> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>
> regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by rajesh sukumaran <ra...@yahoo.co.in>.
that was interesting read... thanks
----- Original Message ----
From: manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de>
To: Tapestry users <us...@tapestry.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 11 March, 2009 11:28:53 PM
Subject: Re: Implication of client side redirect
read this, very interesting:
http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=RedirectAfterPost
rajesh sukumaran schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>
> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>
> regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: Implication of client side redirect
Posted by manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de>.
read this, very interesting:
http://www.theserverside.com/tt/articles/article.tss?l=RedirectAfterPost
rajesh sukumaran schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> I am evaluating Tapestry 5.1 to see if I can use it in one of my new projects. I see that Tapestry uses client side redirects to handle response for event requests. Will this not affect the performance of Tapestry applications, especially under high load? Redirects will result in an additional HTTP hit on the server for every event request that is rendered by a different page. Will this not degrade the responsiveness of the web application as the load increase?
>
> I would like to know what everyone thinks about this?
>
> regards,
> Rajesh
>
>
>
>
> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tapestry.apache.org