|
next
|
Subject: Why Is The Saxon Processor So Slow? Author: Jamil Taylor Date: 05 Oct 2007 12:29 PM
|
Until this thread, I was not aware that I should ignore the first execution of a Saxon-based XSLT transformation. If I throw away the results of the first execution, then Saxon is no longer the slowest processor.
However, if this initialization is required (for whatever reasons), then I cannot throw away the results of the first execution. Saxon is the slowest processor for XSLT transformations. If the reasons for it being the slowest is the loading of Saxon jars, I do not understand why the loading of jars cannot be done during startup. Loading the jars could crash the JVM? Perhaps I should just avoid Saxon...
I am a .NET developer, and I would not complain about the loading of jars in a completely different thread. Of course, I cannot speak on behalf of all .NET developers, but I would not understand the reason behind those who would complain about it.
If Saxon is the fastest/best/etc, I am not seeing proof of that in this implementation of it. It's really not that big of a deal to me, but it is good for analysis.
|
|
|
|