Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 33051 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2005 19:52:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Jun 2005 19:52:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 94408 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2005 19:52:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 94301 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2005 19:52:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 94209 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2005 19:52:53 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from essemtepe.nada.kth.se (HELO smtp.nada.kth.se) (130.237.222.115) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2005 12:52:51 -0700 X-Authentication-Info: The sender was authenticated as danielf using PLAIN at smtp.nada.kth.se Received: from [83.226.251.247] (c-f7fbe253.188-1-64736c14.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [83.226.251.247]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.nada.kth.se (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j51JPtQe016898 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 21:25:56 +0200 (MEST) Message-ID: <429E0C4D.3050404@nada.kth.se> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 21:28:13 +0200 From: Daniel Fagerstrom User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: xslt and jxtg performance References: <429CA32F.3040002@nada.kth.se> <429CBAC3.6010006@nada.kth.se> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Peter Hunsberger wrote: > On 5/31/05, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: > >>BURGHARD �ric wrote: >> >>>Daniel Fagerstrom wrote: >>> >>>>If you want to help making JXTG faster you need to submit more >>>>information. We need examples that reproduce this behaviour with the >>>>JXTG template and the corresponding XSLT. We also need to know exactly >>>>what version of 2.2 you used. How did you measure preformance? Profiling >>>>info is rather helpful >>>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=111625859100003&r=1&w=2. >>> >>>I apologize. >> >>No problem, these performance issues is always a little bit touchy ;) > > It should probably be pointed out that other people have found that > the latest releases of Saxon 8 are significantly faster than previous > versions of Saxon (and it was already faster than many processors). > We've seen much better preformance for some of our stuff. So, much of > this might be a Saxon issue and not JXTG/Cocoon issue... �ric's scripts made heavy use of JXPath on DOM trees, so until I'm proved wrong with hard profiling data, I will assume that it is a JXPath issue rather than an JXTG/Cocoon issue ;) To be able to do know if and in that case where e.g. JXTG have performance problems we need to set up benchmark scripts and profiling as part of the distro. /Daniel