Re: [xslt] libxslt performance problem

On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 10:54:52PM +0100, Martin Gieseking wrote:
> Maybe you should try more recent versions of libxml and libxslt. My

  Yes, definitely !

> experiences with many huge xml files are that libxslt is much faster
> than saxon (while libxslt took about 5 minutes to convert one of my data
> files, I aborted saxon after 20 minutes).

  Let's avoid comparisons at that level. In general algorithms are
more important than the programming language when you think of standalone
applications. Michael Kay has worked immensely on Saxon, it's a good tool.
Libxslt is also a good tool, but sometime one or the other can be trapped
in problematic algorithms or runtime specifics. The best from an user
point of view is to try various tools which fits your needs and select
the best one for your specific case. When there are really surprizing
results, trying to analyze the scenario (using xsltproc -v for example)
and reviewing the stylesheet code to report potential problems to the
given project is the best you can do as an user. Libxslt, Saxon and other
open source project mature and improve based on the users feedback, assuming
the feedback is constructive. I don't have all the time I would like to put
into processing that feedback but it's still very welcome.

  That said, Happy New Year everybody !


Red Hat Virtualization group
Daniel Veillard      | virtualization library
veillard redhat com  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit | Rpmfind RPM search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]