Re: Saxon for windows?

Sorry...  In regards to

> chaining together transformations via a Web Service
> implementation

I should have emphasized the idea of repeated requests back and forth
across the wire as you had suggested.  Obviously if its one request
that invokes a series of transformations without need to return
anything to the requestor before proceeding then this could work quite
well...

On 6/3/05, M. David Peterson <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yeah, the Web Service approach is an excellent approach if your
> talking one off transforms that are coming from multiple requesting
> sources.  A well designed Web Service engine can produce fantastic
> results for a large multitude of requesting clients.  But if you're
> talking about chaining together transformations via a Web Service
> implementation this is something that would obviously be something to
> be leary of.
>
> This is not to down play Web Services from a general stand point.  In
> many ways they can be quite preferable in that you simply have no
> concerns as far as platform compatibilities etc...  but in regards to
> performance... you've allready nailed it so no need to extend.
>
> On 6/3/05, Barry Lay <blay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The XSL-as-web-service is intriguing but I do have some concerns about a
> > command-line processor.  The comment George makes about the JVM startup
> > overhead can be extended to most things run from the command line -
> > there will be system-related activity that has little to do with the
> > work that will be incurred each time.  If this is a concern for XSLT the
> > processor can be properly hosted within the web server.  Saxon is ideal
> > for this as it is Java based.  It would be fairly straightforward to
> > create a web service for this purpose that could be dropped into a J2EE
> > container and run on whatever kind of platform you like (Windows, Linux,
> > Unix, Mac, etc.), and it doesn't have to be the same OS as the client.
> > With Saxon's support for pipelining transformations some of those
> > concerns could be addressed as well.  My main concern with the web
> > service approach in general is the amount of data that would need to be
> > transmitted across the network.  That may be the real limiting factor in
> > this.
> >
> > Barry
> >
> > George Cristian Bina wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Pieter,
> > >
> > > > It's actually quite simple. I'm using a process class which allows
> > > me to
> > > > capture StdOut and StdErr, and that runs a process in the
> > > background. The
> > > > background process can be anything that runs via a command line, and
> > > the
> > > > best is that it runs completely independent (in Windows this just
> > > means on
> > > > another thread). While threads compete with each other for CPU time,
> > > when
> > > > the process runs, the main thread just waits for its output, which
> > > means
> > > > that the child thread can use all CPU available, thus maximum
> > > performance is
> > > > guaranteed (under normal circumstances and no other tasks running
> > > assumed).
> > >
> > > What about the java start up time? You will add that at each run.
> > > And if you run the transformation only once then I think you will not
> > > get the best of Java either - I always hear that if you want to
> > > measure how much time a stylesheet takes for processing you should not
> > > look at the times of the first runs.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents...
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > George
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > George Cristian Bina
> > > <oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger
> > > http://www.oxygenxml.com
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <M:D/>
>
> M. David Peterson
> http://www.xsltblog.com
>


--
<M:D/>

M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com