Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-xalan-j-users-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 77797 invoked by uid 500); 16 Oct 2002 08:00:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xalan-j-users-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list xalan-j-users@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 77790 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2002 08:00:40 -0000 Received: from web21206.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.175.8) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Oct 2002 08:00:40 -0000 Message-ID: <20021016080053.14001.qmail@web21206.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [195.235.30.194] by web21206.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 05:00:53 ART Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 05:00:53 -0300 (ART) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Cristian=20Roldan?= Subject: Xalan 2.1.0 on JDK 1.2.2 runs better than JDK 1.3.1 To: xalan-j-users@xml.apache.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: Hi All, I run the cmd line examples on two diferents versions of JDK always using the same vendor (SUN). I got better performance on JDK 1.2.2 than JDK 1.3.1, also i got the heap usage , using java -Xrunhprof:heap=all.... and I saw that if you SUM the colum "alive object" on JDK 1.3.1 is much bigger than 1.2.2 , my question are : 1) Why on 1.3.1 has worst performance ? 2) Why does JDK 1.3.1 use more heap space ? 3 What can we do to improve the performance on JDK 1.3.1 ? Thanks in adavance !!! Cristian Roldan Ahora pod�s usar Yahoo! Messenger desde tu celular. Aprend� c�mo hacerlo en Yahoo! M�vil: http://ar.mobile.yahoo.com/sms.html