Home/ Questions/Q 7494217
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-29T17:22:59+00:00

It doesn’t make much of a difference, I know, but in JSF 2 I

  • 0

It doesn’t make much of a difference, I know, but in JSF 2 I can output a resource (for instance css), in 1 of two ways:

a) Using the standard html <link> component and an absolute path to the component. This is treated as text and is therefore not built into a component.

b) Using the jsf <h:stylesheet> and setting its name and library.

Now, if I am writing the main template site, something that won’t change (fixed), am I better off using plain text and giving absolute paths to the resources? Is there any change in performance, even if insignificant, between using that and the jsf component?

Does JSF optimize the access to this so that it doesn’t have to locate the resource every time the page is rendered?

The same goes for all types of resources, images and javascript.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    The optimization is actually dependent on the JSF implementation used but yes, both Mojarra and MyFaces have highly optimized the performance of resource handling. Every single possibility of server side and client side caching is been accounted. The most accessed resources are cached in server’s memory, the I/O transfer goes through channels, the proper ETag and Last-Modified response headers are been set, etc. In case of Mojarra, a good starting point to check how it’s all handled is the com.sun.faces.application.resource.ResourceHandlerImpl#handleResourceRequest() method.

    • 0