Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 66201 invoked by uid 500); 19 Apr 2003 17:15:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 66173 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2003 17:15:16 -0000 Received: from mail-2.tiscali.it (195.130.225.148) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Apr 2003 17:15:16 -0000 Received: from apache.org (62.10.46.53) by mail-2.tiscali.it (6.7.016) id 3E9BA3E6002A0C8D for cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 19:15:18 +0200 Message-ID: <3EA18402.4080708@apache.org> Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 19:14:42 +0200 From: Nicola Ken Barozzi Reply-To: nicolaken@apache.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Subject: Re: benchmarking Cocoon? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Stephan Michels wrote, On 19/04/2003 17.33: ... > > You also use buffers between each component to measure the time, like > the ProfilerBlock do. But it's flawed. As we found out in the last Stammtisch, since we use SAX events, parts of the top elements can influence part of the bottom ones, since the top elements go through the fulol pipeline before the bottom are finished. Buffering this is no more: SAX EVENTS a -1-> a1 -2-> a2 b -3-> b3 -4-> b4 c -5-> c5 -6-> c6 BUFFERING a /--> a1 /--> a3 b | b1 | b3 c--/ c1--/ c3 > Yes, the buffer take also time, but in almost > cases less than 1 ms. -- Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) ---------------------------------------------------------------------