Steve,
For what it's worth, I believe most of what you're seeing stems from Dojo's
0.4.x package system - it's a nifty idea but does tend to generate a ton of
requests. You'll see behavior like that whenever you seriously use Dojo (not
just with Woodstock).
I'll let the Lockhart experts comment on potential Lockhart specific remedies
but with Dojo in general, the best way to use it on a true production class,
high traffic site is x-domain via a CDN - see:
http://dojotoolkit.org/node/17
Admittedly I've never looked into having the Woodstock components pull Dojo
from a CDN like AOL but I suspect making that work would be difficult if not
actually impossible. You need to be using a cross domain Dojo build in the
first place and I'm not sure Woodstock does / if you'd hit build compatability
issues right away if you tried this.
--- Steven Bell <bell.steven_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> That's encouraging. Is there any idea of a timeline (4.1 maybe) for these
> changes? Is this a dojo 0.4.3 issue that would require a move to dojo
> 0.9(not a simple jar change from what I understand)? Probably just
> easier if I
> ask if you know what the problem is, and/or what a fix would entail.
>
> It'd even be nice if you could point us in the right direction of a fix, we
> might be able to tackle it on our end and send changes back your way (maybe,
> might take some convincing to get dev resources for that).
>
> On 9/6/07, richard ratta <Richard.Ratta_at_sun.com> wrote:
> >
> > We are working on this issue and trying to improve the file download
> > situation.
> >
> > -rick
> >
> > Steven Bell wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I've been doing evaluations of 3rd party component libraries for a few
> > > weeks now, and Woodstock is one that my group really likes.
> > >
> > > I do have a question on performance though. Specifically with the
> > > table, but I'm guessing we'd see this as we got into other components,
> > > they seem to be sluggish. A little bit of detective work on my end
> > > points the finger at getting all the js files.
> > >
> > > On a fairly basic table, 20-30 items loaded from an in memory list,
> > > sorting takes about three seconds from click to final render. Most if
> > > this time is spend on just over 40 separate GET calls to get the
> > > various js files at about 30-45ms each (local network, server is a
> > > pretty new solaris 10 box, should be more than enough horse power).
> > >
> > > Is there any way to preload/cache/inline these js files? I thought IE
> > > and Firefox would cache the js after the first load, but it looks like
> > > the dojo library is actually making the calls.
> > >
> > > This is a pretty big deal in terms of company adoption of Woodstock.
> > > Any ideas would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Steven Bell
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_woodstock.dev.java.net
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_woodstock.dev.java.net
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Steven Bell
>
later,
Sean
http://seanc.us