On Thu, Dec 20 2007 09:38:47 +0000, gr(_at_)active-media-group(_dot_)com wrote:
...
The problem is that we made some benchmark (not very extensive benchmark
indeed) and seems that the XML::LibXSLT solution is 20% -50% slower in
execution than the XSLTPROC solution. Can anyone confirm or disconfirm this
results? I've surf your mailing list archivie and the net but I can't found
comparative benchlmark.
XML::LibXSLT is libxslt plus a layer of interface code between libxslt
and the interpreted Perl program. It's not surprising that it's slower
than xsltproc.
If it is true, than I have to extend XSLTPROC (performance is the highest
requirement), is there any tutorial how to do this (I've already red the one
in the homepage od LIBXSLT and the one that comes with the source
distribution).
I haven't seen any other tutorial, but you can look at the source code
for the tests in the libxslt source code distribution to see how they do
things.
One thing that's undocumented on the libxslt web site is that recent
versions support extensions as 'plugins' in a 'libxslt-plugins'
directory as an alternative to the previous requirement to make your own
xsltproc-variant that linked to your own extension functions.
Regards,
Tony Graham.
======================================================================
Tony(_dot_)Graham(_at_)MenteithConsulting(_dot_)com
http://www.menteithconsulting.com
Menteith Consulting Ltd Registered in Ireland - No. 428599
Registered Office: 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Menteith Consulting -- Understanding how markup works
======================================================================
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--