RE: Performance degraded with grouping and sorting.

Hi,
There is a benchmark study for XSLT processor done by http://www.sarvega.com.
Or that was at least last year. I don't remember all the details, but one of
there main conclustions is that the performance of Xalan is bad. Worse than
all other processors. Saxon was good but jdxslt was even better.
Cheers,
Agnes


-----Original Message-----
From: JBryant@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:JBryant@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: donderdag 28 oktober 2004 16:48
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re:  Performance degraded with grouping and sorting.


Well, I'm not Kevin, but...

I'd try Saxon. I was using Xalan because it was included with the FOP
distribution, but I changed to Saxon because I wanted a feature of XSL
2.0. I noticed at the time that I got a substantial speed boost as well. I
can't time the two processors to tell you the difference, as my
stylesheets now include XSL 2.0 features that Xalan does not support.

Your mileage may vary, but I suggest that you give Saxon a try.

Jay Bryant
Bryant Communication Services




Bhupendra Singh <skbhupendra@xxxxxxxxxxx>
10/28/2004 09:07 AM
Please respond to
xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kjones@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc

Subject
Re:  Performance degraded with grouping and sorting.






Kev,
Thanks for your reply..If you dont mind can you or
somebody please point to something, where I should be
looking around to increase the performance.
Do you have any ideas how to change the XSLT processor
properties or move to a better performing processor. I
am using Xalan processor currently and you are right I
have a good configuration PC with 1 GB RAM.

regards,
Bhupi.

 --- Kevin Jones <kjones@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2004 16:04, Bhupendra Singh
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have an XML something like this.
>
> Cut...
>
> >
> > After the grouping the total time taken was 45
> secs.
> > which I think is too much.
>
> I would tend to agree. Running a transform based on
> your
> sample the time only doubled between a simple sort
> and your
> code. I could not see any reason you should be
> seeing five
> times worse.
>
> My guess would be it is a "feature" of the XSLT
> processor
> you are using or there is something else in your
> stylesheet
> that is causing the problem. The 5 secs for a simple
> sort
> is also fairly poor (assuming you are running on a
> recent-ish PC) so that may also indicate a processor
> issue.
>
> Kev.
>
>

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com