December last year I've downloaded a complete paper about XSLT performance from
Sarvega. Called SarvegaXSLTBenchmarkStudy2.pdf
Cheers,
Agnes
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Jones [mailto:kjones(_at_)sarvega(_dot_)com]
Sent: dinsdag 27 april 2004 23:01
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [xsl] measuring bulk performance & turn around times of XSL
t ransformations? ideas for: XML to XML, XML to HTML, XML to FO (then to
PD F)
On Tuesday 27 April 2004 6:50 pm, you wrote:
Utilities like XSelerator show you the time needed to do when doing XML
parse, XSL parse, and XSL Transformation time. Very useful. I used various
techniques to process XML and compared those times using MSXML 4.0 (you can
use other processors by simply adding them to the Environmental options).
I would be very careful about only doing that. There are a lot of startup
costs in most XSLT processors that cause problems with one shots tests. You
almost certainly need to use a custom driver that matches how you would like
to use the processors to get accurate figures.
If its WIN32 only, the Microsoft recommendation used to be carry on using
MSXML (via COM) as the .NET XSLT was still under development. Of the publicly
available processors MSXML always comes very high up the benchmarks. If you
want more performance you need to look at the companies that specialize in
XML appliances and/or do some code tuning.
I have spent a fair amount of time comparing XSLT processor performance so
feel free to ask some detailed questions. I also have access to pretty much
the full range of processors if there is some standalone bit of XSLT you are
interested in getting figures for.
Kev
Sarvega Inc.
--+------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--+--