This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 29472

Summary: Speed up startup of JSP debugger module
Product: javaee Reporter: _ rkubacki <rkubacki>
Component: CodeAssignee: Martin Grebac <mgrebac>
Status: VERIFIED FIXED    
Severity: blocker Keywords: PERFORMANCE
Priority: P2    
Version: 3.x   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Linux   
Issue Type: DEFECT Exception Reporter:
Bug Depends on: 30984    
Bug Blocks:    

Description _ rkubacki 2002-12-11 16:06:32 UTC
Currently it registers JSPCompountEvent,
JspServletEvent and installs some listener on
ThreadsRoot.
Comment 1 _ rkubacki 2002-12-11 16:09:30 UTC
Currently it takes 18ms to analyze mafifest sections and >200ms to
execute restored()
Comment 2 _ rkubacki 2003-01-13 12:18:53 UTC
Tegal planning
Comment 3 _ rkubacki 2003-01-16 12:22:45 UTC
Small gain can be obtain by moving ExecPerformer into separate place
so its classes (and superclasses) won't be resolved. This is only
smaller part

The bigger is event registration - here we need to discuss it with Hanz. 

Also we need investigate how much of functionality provided by
JspDataObjectIE will remain here if we change our concept of JSP
compilation (less loaders is always good idea).
Comment 4 _ rkubacki 2003-01-23 13:08:50 UTC
Only partial improvements can be done for s1s4.2
Comment 5 Martin Grebac 2003-02-12 10:41:17 UTC
 The ExecPerformer has been moved into a separate class (in trunk), so
it's not loaded/resolved on startup.
 
 And (see 30984), since event registration is not planned to be fixed
for this release, this is all I can do for startup.

 
Comment 6 Martin Grebac 2003-02-20 17:31:09 UTC
New issue #31279 has been been submitted to track further improvements
in the next release, so closing this issue as fixed, since all the
possible improvements have been made.
Comment 7 Martin Grebac 2003-02-21 08:12:03 UTC
The target milestone shouldn't be changed for this issue. My mistake,
sorry for confusion.
Comment 8 _ rkubacki 2003-07-09 13:25:06 UTC
verified