This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: A simple question
----- Original Message -----
From: Oscar Gonzalez <oscar.gonzalez@100world.es>
Subject: RE: A simple question
> I don't understand your answer (it doesn't have answers!).
I think it does.
> So if simplifying some things :
>
> If you're not using caching : I think the answer should be "no".
This is the answer. If you'r not using caching - I think it will
be "too slow" for heavy-traffic website.
I don't know will it be 'too slow' for you particular case.
> If you are using caching ( even brutal one, like, for
> example, AxKit ) - I think the answer should be : "yes".
This is also the answer. For high-traffic website,
no matter how much time the transformation takes,
if you are caching the result of transformation it all
gets comparable to the static page.
The url of AxKit website is www.axkit.org
Or www.axkit.com
> > Using which processor?
>
> Does not really matter, I think.
And this is also the answer. For high-traffic
website the speed of particular XSLT engine
does not matter, because saving milliseconds
when you are wasting seconds - does not
matter.
> Have you any experience in XSLT in high-traffic
> (put 200hps) websites?
No.
But I have used different XSLT engines and I did
some profiling ( Really. I did some profiling,
using commercial Java profiler "Jprobe" or something).
Also I understand what are the bottlenecks of XSLT
and bottlenecks of 200 hps websites.
Also I know how to make 200 hps website powered
by XSLT. And this has nothing to do with the
XSLT engine I'll have to use.
Rgds.Paul.
PS. Actually, this monday ( tomorrow ) I'll be discussing
exactly those issues with some world-known
website which gets more than 200 hps. And they are
shooting for XSL. So maybe after a couple of weeks
I'll answer "yes" to your question. At the moment -
no, sorry, I can not claim I already did that. Will be
interesting to see somebody who already did.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list