Am 04.02.2020 um 01:49 schrieb Michael Kay mike(_at_)saxonica(_dot_)com:
I haven't studied it in close detail, but I strongly suspect that the
initial processing of the input files is streamed, but at some stage
in the processing pipeline everything ends up in memory.
Martin's solution uses arrays, and array processing in Saxon is
generally not pipelined in the way that sequence processing (normally)
is. For example, operations such as filtering and mapping on sequences
are generally pipelined (whether or not the input is streamed), while
the equivalent operations on arrays will materialise the array in memory.
There's no intrinsic reason for not pipelining operations on arrays,
other than the lesson I learnt many years ago as an undergraduate
computer science student: when you're doing optimisation, focus your
efforts on the constructs that are encountered most frequently. Today
everyone is using sequences, and not many people are using arrays.
I certainly prefer using sequences of nodes to arrays of nodes but with
the restrictions on streamable stylesheet functions and processing of
streamed nodes I manage to pass in
to a function taking a sequence of nodes <xsl:param name="pair"
as="element()*"/> but even an an attempt to solely output (the) two
items in the sequence by name, using positional predicates with
is rejected by the streamability analysis with
XTSE3430: Function mf:compare is not streamable. There is more than
one consuming operand:
So that's why experimented with the array or also with a map/tuple of
the two streamed nodes from different documents, with the sequence of
two nodes I don't manage to compare them without breaking the
streamability rules of not allowing more than one consuming operand.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
or by email: xsl-list-unsub(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com