cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joerg Heinicke <joerg.heini...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: slow pipeline (svg, aggregation)
Date Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:25:11 GMT
On 19.01.2004 15:42, Jan Hoskens wrote:

> Well, I'm currently using both (started with cinclude, then just curious to
> use xinclude, ending up with them both;-), but have not yet noticed a big
> difference between them (nor any problems). The only thing to keep in mind,
> as far as I know, is that cinclude is cocoon-specific. I do not know if
> there are important differences that may affect your performance.
> 
> A cocoon-guru's opinion would be very usefull here!

I don't see me as a guru, but a heavy user, but here is my opinion. The 
differences on implementation level and so on performance or working in 
general should be marginal - besides that cinclude is cacheable while 
xinclude is not. Therefore xinclude in 2.1 is standard compliant, in 2.0 
it is not. And choosing sitemap aggregation or c/xinclude depeds on 
static or dynamic number of includes. If you know you always have to 
aggregate header, footer, navigation and content of a page, use sitemap 
aggregation. If it depends on the input and the number is dynamic use 
xinclude. If the process takes to much time or the included stuff is 
mostly static use the caching provided with cinclude. I can not confirm 
that sitemap aggregation does not work or is buggy. When something is 
buggy - and it is at least more often than I would like to see it for 
such an important feature - than it is the internal processing using 
cocoon:/. But there is no difference for it between sitemap aggregation, 
cinclude or xinclude.

Joerg

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@cocoon.apache.org


Mime
View raw message