This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: switching from xalan (J) to saxon


I was running both from a java application, and found Saxon to be much
faster.  I am transforming xml pages that are at times 5 mb.

Here is why I switched:

Before:
Query : less than a second
Marshalling of Query to XML : 21 seconds
XSLT Transform : 99 seconds.
 
Total time : ~ 120 seconds 
 
After:
Query : less than second.
Marshalling of Query to XML : 21 seconds.
XSLT Transform : 3 seconds.
 
Total time : ~25 seconds
 
Now, I don't know why the transform performance was so much different, it
may have to do with my XSLT, but Saxon seems to be able to transform it
faster.

Here is the XSL example of my transform, nothing fancy. 


<xsl:template match="/">
<ORGANIZATION>CAISO
<REPORT_ITEM>
<HEADER>
<REPORT>MKTGOALS_PROCRES</REPORT>
<SYSTEM>OASIS</SYSTEM>
<TZ>PPT</TZ>
<MKT_TYPE><xsl:value-of select="//ROW/@MKT_TYPE"/></MKT_TYPE>
<SCHED_CLASS></SCHED_CLASS>
<UOM>MW</UOM>
<INTERVAL>ENDING</INTERVAL>
<SEC_PER_INTERVAL>3600</SEC_PER_INTERVAL>
</HEADER>
<xsl:apply-templates/>
</REPORT_ITEM>
</ORGANIZATION>
</xsl:template>
 
 
<xsl:template match="//ROW">
 
<DATA>
  <TYPE><xsl:value-of select="@LABEL"/></TYPE>
  <RESOURCE/>
  <DATE><xsl:value-of select="substring(@LOADDATE, 1, 8)"/></DATE>
  <INTERVAL_NUM>1</INTERVAL_NUM>
  <NULL_FLAG><xsl:value-of select="@NULL_FLAG_HE01"/></NULL_FLAG>
  <VALUE><xsl:value-of select="@HE01"/></VALUE>
</DATA>
 
<DATA>
  <TYPE><xsl:value-of select="@LABEL"/></TYPE>
 <RESOURCE/>
  <DATE><xsl:value-of select="substring(@LOADDATE, 1, 8)"/></DATE>
  <INTERVAL_NUM>2</INTERVAL_NUM>
  <NULL_FLAG><xsl:value-of select="@NULL_FLAG_HE02"/></NULL_FLAG>
  <VALUE><xsl:value-of select="@HE02"/></VALUE>
</DATA>

....
-----Original Message-----
From: Nanto, Dan [mailto:dnanto@solant.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 12:22 PM
To: 'xsl-list@mulberrytech.com'
Subject: RE: switching from xalan (J) to saxon


We have been evaluating both Saxon and Xalan, and have not seen much of a
performance difference.  We are currently planning on using xalan.  Did you
see a large performance difference between the two?  Were you using this at
run time of from the command line?  Any input would be greatly appreciated!

-Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: Messineo, Chris [mailto:CMessineo@caiso.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 10:22 AM
To: 'xsl-list@mulberrytech.com'
Subject: RE: switching from xalan (J) to saxon


I made the change from Xalan to Saxon, and did not have to change any of my
xslt pages.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Herschke [mailto:robert@herschke.de]
Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2000 2:21 AM
To: xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
Subject: switching from xalan (J) to saxon


 Hello everybody,
 
 For performance reasons we will switch our renderer from xalan to saxon
 soon.
 Perhaps somebody has done this too.
 
 My questions:
 
 - are there some tables or lists of xsl-constructs that doesn't match in
 this two processors ?
 
 - are there known issues, like "Do not use this in saxon, as you do it in
 xalan"?
 
 - does anybody know something about conversions between XSL-files written
 for Xalan to XSL-Files converted for Saxon?
 
 --- or are there 100% compatibility between the constructs in XSL-files?
 
 Thanks for your help in advance!
 Robert



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]